Do we Catholics believe in ESP?

[thistle]

I read about the lives of the Saints constantly, and - one of the remarkable things I note is - the accounts almost always tend to speak of miraculous abilities the Saint had.

For instance, Saint Therese of Lisieux (Happy Feast Day to Her!!!, btw), claimed to be able to read hearts; Saint Faustina could see and speak with Jesus; and so on… Some Saints have Levitated… Some have worked cures or cast out demons…

I think we give different names to these abilities - e.g. reader of hearts, prophecy, discernment, (infused) prayer, and so on… In Catholicism, they seem to get lumped into what’s called “supernatural” phenomenon…

But here’s the rub…

When it comes to other, perhaps more secular or clinical, forms of language - terms like “paranormal”, “metaphysics”, “E.S.P.”, “telekinesis” and so on… even “ghosts”… how are we to regard this use of other, perhaps not-necessarily-Catholic language?

The reason I ask is because - I wonder… is it okay to say a Saint, like St Therese, who had the ability to read hearts, had ESP… or Saint Faustina, who could see Jesus, was a “sensitive” or like a clairvoyant because (based upon Jesus’ instruction) she predicted, or perhaps best called “prophecized”, WWII?

CCC 2115 God can reveal the future to his prophets or to other saints. Still, a sound Christian attitude consists in putting oneself confidently into the hands of Providence for whatever concerns the future, and giving up all unhealthy curiosity about it. Improvidence, however, can constitute a lack of responsibility.

CCC 2116 All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to “unveil” the future.48 Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm reading, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone.

CCC 2117 All practices of magic or sorcery , by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one’s service and have a supernatural power over others - even if this were for the sake of restoring their health - are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritism often implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another’s credulity.

 

[Wm777]

I think you make a good point, thistle.

But, while CCC 2116-2117 make it clear clairvoyance is a no-go, I had to really stop and think about CCC 2115. When you look at the lives of the prophets and saints, they could see the future via God’s revelations. The secular definition of clairvoyance is the alleged ability to see into the future, so we end up run in a circle.

The CCC seems to be a general guide, so it may not tell us enough to really deep dive into how the Bishops came to those conclusions. But one thing seems clear - divination, which I think they mean is a human ability to sense the future, most likely to manipulate it to one’s advantage, is not discernment - which I take to be understanding and accepting the will of God.

One of the key differentiators between divination and discernment seems to be somehow dependent upon yet an even deeper difference - i.e. the difference between knowledge and faith. Belief in magic or a clairvoyant would be more like superstition. Belief in mere knowledge might be just agnostic in nature. Belief in the providence of an eternal, incomprehensible, infinite, mysterious and Triune God who created and redeemed us supercedes them all.

In my wanderings, it gave rise to the question of gnosis; I’m still working on understanding if this is the case, but I think some of the more questionable ideas of gnosis’s origin might have come from Ezekiel, particularly via Kabbala.

I dont know much about Kabbala, so I wouldnt speak of them in an accusatory sense. They were mystics, who believed in the God of Abraham, and they reflected upon Ezekiel - so they must have had some redeeming qualities. But both ancient and modern interpretations about them abound the number of which may just confuse matters. In any case, they were interested in a sort of “gnosis” that may have had an impact on some of the CCC’s conclusions regarding 2115. I dont know. I have to learn and discern more about them.

It just seems to me, since we are called to imitate and contemplate the lives of the Saints and Prophets; and, since we are supposed to pray, and knock for our prayers to be answered; and, since we are supposed to be able to discern the will of God in our lives - if, then, we are sent what Saint Teresa of Avila called “locutions”, “visions”, or simply an answer to our prayers - it’s going to require some supernatural sense of things, and so we should be able to respond to the fulfillment of our prayers in faith.

That’s more the point of my question here.

 

[CRM_Brother]

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Hamlet 1.5.167-168, Hamlet to Horatio

The philosophy I am speaking of is the modern approach to the ‘paranormal’.

The modern view of ESP is an attempt of generally non-religious world views to justify the existence of extra-scientific phenomenon from a scientific starting point. It is generally lumped in with ‘telekinesis’, ‘paranormal’, etc. They try to force spiritual phenomenon into a rigid scientific mindset. These concepts inherently start with the individual and proceed outward. This is where Catholicism comes into conflict.

The Catholic Church (and the Orthodox Church, for that matter) have been studying these phenomenon for almost two thousand years. We have found that the phenomenon do not begin with the individual, but rather end in the individual. They always find their origin in God or the demonic (in very specific cases). It is not the powers of the person, but the powers of God (or demon) which the person just happens to experience.

People with these gifts like St. Therese or St. Pio of Pietrelcina are humble recipients of these powers. They do not enact them through their own will. These gifts are normal spiritual powers. They are rare and granted sparingly, but there is nothing ‘paranormal’ about them. They are simply ‘supernatural’, that is, above the natural physical order of reality. They are spiritual gifts and, as such, they conform to the higher spiritual laws of reality and the physical laws of reality (science) cedes way before them.

 

[Lee1]

But, while CCC 2116-2117 make it clear clairvoyance is a no-go, I had to really stop and think about CCC 2115. When you look at the lives of the prophets and saints, they could see the future via God’s revelations. The secular definition of clairvoyance is the alleged ability to see into the future, so we end up run in a circle.

My thinking on this is that consulting clairvoyants is a no go but being clairvoyant through grace is okay.

The difference is one of source really, if it’s from God then so be it but otherwise it’s not to be trusted and in fact avoided since truth will be mixed with untruth, perhaps not purposely being charitable about it.

 

[Dan_Defender]

Dabbling in the paranormal on the other hand is considered to be the sin of witchcraft , and Scripture absolutely forbids all forms of witchcraft - see Deut.18: 10-12 Satan always tries to mimic God’s good gifts.

This. The saints were given gifts from God. Anything that claims to be supernatural but is not from God should be rejected.