"Expelled"

[reggieM]

My hesitation in calling it a miracle in no way decreases my gratitude. I just find it a little facile to find God in every instance like this, and not to find God in counter-instances. If it’s a miracle that one child is pulled alive from the rubble of a school, is it not also a miracle of a different order that 899 died? Surely God was with the 899 as much as with the one.

Your initial response was that it was a miracle. For me, that’s the key point here. Your son has some element of risk in just about every action. Riding the bus to school, some horrible thing (God forbid) could happen, but we don’t conclude that it’s a miracle that he got to school safely. It’s a gift of God, it’s divine providence and care – but it’s not something that we walk away from thinking that it was a miracle of God’s intervention.

This is very relevant to this topic itself, and that’s why I appreciate your reply - it helps me understand your thinking here.

If the bridge that your boy fell off of had a soft landing beneath, or it was a couple of feet up – you could still say it was a miracle. But if the bridge was 10 feet up and there were sharp rocks at the bottom – lots of them, and perhaps there was only one possible way that he could have landed to avoid serious injury …

That’s why you look at it and realize it was a miracle of grace. God intervened to change the more probable result.

Usually, when a child falls off of a bridge like that, some serious damage results – it could be life-threatening.

In this case, he was fine. You concluded “a miracle”. I would agree (not having seen the situation).

Again, as I see it, this is highly relevant to the discussion on these evolutionary threads. Your gut (perhaps “inner Catholic”) reaction was “this is a miracle – thank God!”

To say now that it was essentially the same kind of event as the deaths of hundreds of children in an earthquake brings into question the notion of a miracle and God’s intervention. If both events are the same, then it’s senseless to speak about “miracles” at all. And this is precisely the evolutionist-Darwinist view.

In my belief, God does intervene directly in the world – beyond evolution and what Darwinian theory can explain. God creates directly – outside of evolution. I see evidence of this – where science does not.

 

[drpmjhess]

There is no empirical evidence for macroevolution.

Creationism’s evolution, caught on tape

A nonprofit’s archives track the rise and fall of attacks on evolution

Oakland, California, May 20, 2008 – Evolution’s opponents have taken another round of losses recently, with the failures of the creationist propaganda movie Expelled, a creationist bid to grant science education degrees in Texas, and antievolution legislation in Florida, Alabama, and Missouri. A new video from the National Center for Science Education shows how the nonprofit’s archives preserves the history of creationist attacks on science education, and how NCSE uses information from its archives to block new attacks.

“With creationists,” explains Eugenie C. Scott, NCSE’s executive director, “there’s a lot of recycling: the same arguments are made over and over, just with new labels and rhetoric. So when we needed to show that ‘intelligent design’ was a rebranding of creationism, we went to the archives and proved that the same people had been making the same arguments, just dressed up with a fancy new name.”

The new video, “Jesus in My Classroom,” posted today at www.ExpelledExposed.com, shows how NCSE’s archives helped win the seminal Kitzmiller v. Dover trial by tracing the history of the “intelligent design” textbook at issue in the trial. As the video shows, a clipping in NCSE’s archives tipped off lawyers for the Dover parents that the textbook was originally intended to present “both evolution and creation.” After a Supreme Court decision holding it unconstitutional to teach creationism in science class, the textbook authors replaced references to “creation” with “design.” Careful review even found a so-called missing link: a passage in which “creationists” was revised to “cdesign proponentsists,” rather than the intended “design proponents.”

“Our archives aren’t just for lawyers,” says Charles Hargrove, NCSE’s archivist. “Historians and other social scientists who need access to back issues of creationist periodicals like the Bible-Science Newsletter or tapes of creationist debates rely on these archives. The fight over creationism is an important part of American history, and our archives are vital for researchers at NCSE and beyond.” NCSE’s archives include over 2500 books, nearly 100 linear feet of magazines, pamphlets and personal papers, and over 500 hours of video and audio recordings.

Josh Rosenau, a spokesman for NCSE, describes how he uses these archives. “When a new creationist textbook or pamphlet or video emerges, we can locate previous works by the same authors, and trace the inspiration for their bogus scientific claims.” Echoing NCSE’s motto, he added, “When you’re defending the teaching of evolution in the public schools, you have to know what you’re up against – even if it turns out to be something familiar.”

The National Center for Science Education is a non-profit organization dedicated to defending the teaching of evolution in the public schools. The NCSE maintains its archive of source material on the history of creationism at its Oakland, California, headquarters. On the web at www.ncseweb.org.

NCSE’s other website, www.ExpelledExposed.com, is a resource for journalists, teachers, and curious moviegoers who want the full story behind the creationist movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.

Contacts:
Eugenie C. Scott, scott@ncseweb.org, 800-290-6006
Josh Rosenau, rosenau@ncseweb.org, 800-290-6006
Louise S. Mead, mead@ncseweb.org, 800-290-6006

 

[drpmjhess]

In this case, he was fine. You concluded “a miracle”. I would agree (not having seen the situation).Again, as I see it, this is highly relevant to the discussion on these evolutionary threads. Your gut (perhaps “inner Catholic”) reaction was “this is a miracle – thank God!”

To say now that it was essentially the same kind of event as the deaths of hundreds of children in an earthquake brings into question the notion of a miracle and God’s intervention. If both events are the same, then it’s senseless to speak about “miracles” at all. And this is precisely the evolutionist-Darwinist view.

Reggie, in order to avoid the idea that God is capricious – saving a few children but omitting to save many others – some people postulate a God who acts continuously and purposefully, but well beyond our comprehension. About a decade ago I team-taught a science and religion class with a new-agey sort of mathematician, who preached a bizarre karmic theodicy. We were discussing the crash of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island, on which he had a friend who died. I was arguing that God allows freedom to the world even if that means bad thighs happen. My co-teacher argued that all 230 people had been brought together to die on that flight for karmic reasons.

So, while I am thankful that my son was not injured by his fall, I do not ascribe the outcome to greater moral worthiness than other children who were not so fortunate. Nor do I assume that some “guardian angels” are more competent than others. Nor do I assume that God was paying more careful attention in that corner of the world at that moment than God did in China last week. My theodicy is closer to that of John Haught, for whom creaturely freedom is so important to God that God allows freedom to the world, suffering with us when we suffer the results of apparently random accidents and occurrences. The rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.

Petrus

 

[reggieM]

So, while I am thankful that my son was not injured by his fall, I do not ascribe the outcome to greater moral worthiness than other children who were not so fortunate. Nor do I assume that some “guardian angels” are more competent than others. Nor do I assume that God was paying more careful attention in that corner of the world at that moment than God did in China last week. My theodicy is closer to that of John Haught, for whom creaturely freedom is so important to God that God allows freedom to the world, suffering with us when we suffer the results of apparently random accidents and occurrences. The rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.

Ok, thanks for explaining this. I can see your error in the text. It’s contained in the line where you mention “moral worthiness”. You think that God will only work miracles for people who are morally worthy. That’s the theological error here. God often works miracles for those who are deeply in sin – to win a spirit of gratitude from them. He might work a miracle for someone who is morally compromised in his ridicule of the magisterium of the Church, mockery of orthodox teachings and promulgation of moral relativism under the guise of Catholic theology. God might do that to draw some humility and gratitude from such a person – as he did with St. Paul (in the miracle of Christ’s revelation on the road to Damascus). St. Paul was not more worthy – on the contrary. It is when we are in sin that Christ reaches us with miracles – to save us.

In your case, you might actually be more worthy – I don’t know. But either God worked a miracle for your son or He didn’t.

If you’re saying that God didn’t intervene to save your son, then this discussion is pointless (and you’ve just contradicted your earlier posts).

If you’re saying that all events are explained through karma – then you’re denying the efficacy of prayer (or even the reason to pray for help from God).

As I said, your view of the Faith is confused and misdirected.

I was glad to see you recognize a miracle (as we should in events like that). I’m sad now that your recognition was so short lived – and now you’re denying that God should even be acknowledged as saving your son from a worse calamity.

You don’t want to think that God pays more attention to some things than to others. This aligns pretty well with Darwinist-Theism, I would think. In that view, God is out there, doing things. There is no sense in praying to God because God will do things anyway.

But the fact is, many people do not ever pray to God for help. In your view, God will provide just as much grace for those people as He will for people who pray constantly for help.

That’s the liberal-Catholic notion. There is no need to pray to God for help because that’s “selfish” and God will help you anyway.

So, we not only see a denial of God as Father and provider, but we see a denial of another part of the Lord’s prayer – “give us this day our daily bread”.

Supposedly, that prayer is useless because God will do it anyway. Perhaps you believe that Jesus added that part because he was culturally conditioned to do so – because otherwise it is unnecessary to pray for daily bread (and the protection of our children from harm)??

The fact that bad things happen to good people does not mean that miracles of grace and help do not happen either.

 

[OTavern]

Originally Posted by drpmjhess

So, while I am thankful that my son was not injured by his fall, I do not ascribe the outcome to greater moral worthiness than other children who were not so fortunate…

My theodicy is closer to that of John Haught, for whom creaturely freedom is so important to God that God allows freedom to the world, suffering with us when we suffer the results of apparently random accidents and occurrences. The rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.

Ok, thanks for explaining this. I can see your error in the text. It’s contained in the line where you mention “moral worthiness”. You think that God will only work miracles for people who are morally worthy. That’s the theological error here…

If you’re saying that all events are explained through karma – then you’re denying the efficacy of prayer (or even the reason to pray for help from God).

As I said, your view of the Faith is confused and misdirected.

I was glad to see you recognize a miracle (as we should in events like that). I’m sad now that your recognition was so short lived – and now you’re denying that God should even be acknowledged as saving your son from a worse calamity.

In your view, God will provide just as much grace for those people as He will for people who pray constantly for help.

That’s the liberal-Catholic notion. There is no need to pray to God for help because that’s “selfish” and God will help you anyway.

So, we not only see a denial of God as Father and provider, but we see a denial of another part of the Lord’s prayer – “give us this day our daily bread”.

I apologize for involving myself in this discussion, but from the point of view of an “objective” observer, I do not believe drpmjhess is stating, nor even implying all the ideas you are ascribing to him, Reggie. He does not seem to be presupposing karma nor denying God as Father. He certainly does not seem to be denying the value of prayer. This is, of course up to drpmjhess to rectify.

What is abundantly clear and should not be forgotten, however, is that supernatural incursion into the natural course of events is very much a mystery. What makes any miracle mysterious is the nature of God as Eternal, Infinitely loving, All-Knowing and All-powerful. Why God does what He does is often beyond our comprehension. Even why other human beings act in the way they do is often beyond understanding. That is because humans are indeterminate beings. Freedom of will means we do not always follow strictly the “laws of nature.” If we did, our wills would not be free. Same with God. He is not restricted by causal principles inherent in matter. We often have evidence of this freedom when events happen “miraculously,” but that does not mean we can find a pattern of action or begin to “pigeonhole” the divine Will.

I think this was something of what drpmjhess meant when he stated, “creaturely freedom is so important to God that God allows freedom to the world”

An important aspect of knowing God is discovering His unfathomable nature, which in turns leads us to discovering the depths of our own beings – depths which far surpass our own self-knowledge but which become enlightened by the presence of God’s Spirit.

Events in my life, especially those of a very serious, traumatic or grave nature, I have discovered, often serve to “open” me beyond the quaint little concepts of myself and of God that I hold on to for security. Just when I think I “have a hold” on Him, I discover how silly it was to think I was even close. That is why He is the “Living” God – not a philosophical concept.

The “idols” we are cautioned against adulating are often those created in our minds that take the place of the “Living God.” In like manner, in order to truly love our “neighbors” we must overcome the biases and concepts of what we think “they” are like in order to truly discover and love “them” as they really are.

God often acts as a “wrecking” crew – a two-edged sword – to break down barriers, mostly those internal obstacles and hardened areas of the heart which keep us from being “fully” human, fully alive and true children of God. His actions are frequently of a “surprising” nature intended to touch the intimate depths of hearts and to “open” our inner beings. His actions cannot be quantified or statistically analyzed for certainty or probability.

He leaves a hundred sheep alone to find and save one – only He knows why. Eight hundred may die and one spared, but every one of those eight hundred are as fully in God’s heart as the one spared. He is closer to us than we are to ourselves, experiences everything we do with far greater clarity and intensity than our limited minds and hearts do and He loves us infinitely more than we love ourselves.

We are cautioned against judging the intentions of others. Perhaps this caution, too, applies to God. By asking why He saves one but lets 800 others die perhaps we are making the mistake of applying human capacities and motives to God and thereby reducing Him to “our level” to make a “judgement” about His actions.

 

[reggieM]

Freedom of will means we do not always follow strictly the “laws of nature.”

Agreed. We are not products of evolution but of divine providence. We are shaped by God and not by Darwinian processes.

We often have evidence of this freedom when events happen “miraculously,” but that does not mean we can find a pattern of action or begin to “pigeonhole” the divine Will.

I’m sorry but I don’t understand what you’re getting at here.

I think this was something of what drpmjhess meant when he stated, “creaturely freedom is so important to God that God allows freedom to the world”

Again, I didn’t understand that either in the context of what we were talking about (being thankful for a miracle from God).

I agree with the rest of what you posted. But my concern was that drhess was initially glad that God worked a miracle to save his son from a terrible accident, but then he wouldn’t affirm that again. I read his explanation – that calling it a “miracle” means that he or his son is somehow more “morally worthy” than the people who died in China, or that his guardian angel is better than someone else’s.

Again, I conclude that it would be impossible to thank God for a miracle of any kind if those are the considerations that take place in every instance.

God does intervene in our affairs and He does work miracles. We should be grateful for that and praise Him without being embarrassed to say so.

 

[drpmjhess]

What is abundantly clear and should not be forgotten, however, is that supernatural incursion into the natural course of events is very much a mystery. What makes any miracle mysterious is the nature of God as Eternal, Infinitely loving, All-Knowing and All-powerful. Why God does what He does is often beyond our comprehension. Even why other human beings act in the way they do is often beyond understanding. That is because humans are indeterminate beings. Freedom of will means we do not always follow strictly the “laws of nature.” If we did, our wills would not be free. Same with God. He is not restricted by causal principles inherent in matter. We often have evidence of this freedom when events happen “miraculously,” but that does not mean we can find a pattern of action or begin to “pigeonhole” the divine Will.

Thank you for this very insightful post, OTavern! I like your stressing of the mystery of the divine will. Too often monotheists do try to pigeonhole God; I can offer examples from all three Abrahamic faiths:

(1) In 1997, residents of Assisi lamented that they had brought the devastating earthquake on themselves, as divine punishment for selling too many religious artifacts to tourists. They did not mention plate tectonics in their account.

(2) In 2005, Muslim clerics from southern Indonesia blamed the “faithlessness” of Muslims in Banda Aceh for bringing the destruction of the tsunami upon themselves. They didn’t account for all the good people who lived there, or for the fact that the tsunami had a very clear physical cause, or that it caused widespread destruction elsewhere than Banda Aceh.

(3) Last year a Jewish writer in Israel claimed that God must love Christians more than God loves Muslims, because more Muslims die in earthquakes. He didn’t include in his article the calculations of fault proximity and building codes.

Too facile an interpretation of why some survive and others do not survive natural disasters does not help. This does not mean, of course, that we throw up our hands in despair and conclude that all is the result of blind forces. But it does suggest the need for theological caution!

Petrus

 

[OTavern]

Originally Posted by OTavern
We often have evidence of this freedom when events happen “miraculously,” but that does not mean we can find a pattern of action or begin to “pigeonhole” the divine Will.

I’m sorry but I don’t understand what you’re getting at here.

Again, I didn’t understand that either in the context of what we were talking about (being thankful for a miracle from God).

Miracles, I suspect, ought to be treated like great works of art: appreciated and marvelled at for the “strokes” of genius and sheer wonderment they bring about, but not analyzed and deconstructed to find all the implications. Miracles are “targeted” by God for a specific impact, just as a great artist intuitively understands the effect a musical piece or painting will have on those who experience it. Calculated analysis often “tampers” with the immediacy of the experience and spoils it.

I agree with the rest of what you posted. But my concern was that drhess was initially glad that God worked a miracle to save his son from a terrible accident, but then he wouldn’t affirm that again.

That is not what I understood drpmjhess to mean. He was simply struggling with “why” God would do what clearly seemed like a miracle in his son’s case, but wondered why God would also not do the same for others who suffer different endings to similar events. Why does God seem to treat equal needs and worths so radically different?

I read his explanation – that calling it a “miracle” means that he or his son is somehow more “morally worthy” than the people who died in China, or that his guardian angel is better than someone else’s.

Again, this was not the way I read his post, just the opposite in fact. His statements were those of “wondering” if moral worthiness or other considerations made any difference at all in why God brings about miracles because they didn’t seem to in his case. “The people in China had no less a moral claim to a miracle than his son so why were they not spared?” was the question being asked.

 

[reggieM]

His statements were those of “wondering” if moral worthiness or other considerations made any difference at all in why God brings about miracles because they didn’t seem to in his case. “The people in China had no less a moral claim to a miracle than his son so why were they not spared?” was the question being asked.

Have you read anything about the lives of people like St. Pio of Pietrelcina, Fr. Solanus Casey, St. Anthony Claret or St. Francis de Paola?

If not, I recommend that you read about their lives. As it stands, you appear to be lacking some knowledge about how God acts with people and what miracles are.

If God works a miracle for a person, it’s a sign of bad faith (and in fact, insulting to God) to deny that the miracle occurred.

 

[OTavern]

Have you read anything about the lives of people like St. Pio of Pietrelcina, Fr. Solanus Casey, St. Anthony Claret or St. Francis de Paola?

If not, I recommend that you read about their lives. As it stands, you appear to be lacking some knowledge about how God acts with people and what miracles are.

If God works a miracle for a person, it’s a sign of bad faith (and in fact, insulting to God) to deny that the miracle occurred.

I don’t believe God is so exacting or testy about our capacity to identify miracles.

The important ways in which “God acts with people” transcends external phenomena, no matter how “miraculous” these appear. More important is our grace-enabled capacity to see Him, to know Him and to love Him for Who He Is.

Miracles may be special little “gifts,” left by God, but a clear recognition of the Giver is far more important for our spiritual health. If you have the awareness of being “known” by the Giver, the gifts become deeply meaningful, but to debate their value or the consequences of not recognizing them as “signs or wonders” carries no enduring benefit.

To portray God as standing by and evaluating our inability to recognize a miracle and then taking offence at our lack of insight or inadequate wonderment at His talent for conjuring or manipulating nature seems somewhat misguided.

I sincerely doubt He would be “insulted” by our “bad faith” or lack of knowledge in the way you hold Him to be, since nothing we do would “surprise” Him. He knows us better than we know ourselves.

I may be completely off the mark here, but my understanding of Scripture, prayer, meditation and training in philosophy and theology through the years tells me that sincerity - spiritual honesty - in “wondering” and our effort to come closer to God – even honest doubt – is more valued by God than whether we are “right” about an “interpretation” of one event in life.

Be sure, then, that you are never spiteful or deceitful, or hypocritical, or envious and critical of each other. You are newborn, and, like babies, you should be hungry for nothing but milk – the spiritual honesty which will help you to grow up to salvation – now that you have tasted the goodness of the Lord
1 Peter 2:1-3

 

[reggieM]

If you have the awareness of being “known” by the Giver, the gifts become deeply meaningful, but to debate their value or the consequences of not recognizing them as “signs or wonders” carries no enduring benefit.

Ok, I’ll have to disagree with you here. I believe the Holy See’s Congregation for the Causes of Saints would disagree as well – as would the Lourdes Medical Bureau. The value of miracles has a very lasting value and benefit.

To portray God as standing by and evaluating our inability to recognize a miracle and then taking offence at our lack of insight or inadequate wonderment at His talent for conjuring or manipulating nature seems somewhat misguided.

Our blessed Lord lamented that only one leper returned to give Him thanks for the miraculous healing he received.

This was a message for us all – do not take the gifts and wonders of God for granted. Certainly, don’t take the scoffing and skeptical attitude that God didn’t even work the miracle itself.

I may be completely off the mark here, but my understanding of Scripture, prayer, meditation and training in philosophy and theology through the years tells me

Well, you didn’t answer my question about the lives of the saints that I proposed, so that’s one part of the issue that is missing in my view. I would add The Life of St. Benedict as told by Pope St. Gregory the Great to my recommendation for you also.

Personally, I do feel that you are off the mark here. Not completely, but you’re missing what is meant when God works a miracle for a person and what our response should be for that gift. We need to have a grateful heart. To adopt an attitude of doubt or skepticism is to destroy even the joy that one should have in seeing God’s hand at work in our life.

But in any case, I can understand your point of view. I don’t know if you’re Catholic or not so I can’t really pursue this. I’ll just say that you seem to be arguing from a position of doubt and confusion and not of confidence and trust. But I can also recognize the good points you’re making as well.

For those who have seen the miraculous power of God at work – those with a terminal illness who were cured through prayer or a sacramental or from a holy person – they usually don’t philosophize about it and try to dismiss what happened.

Their “spiritual honesty” is in the form of tears of joy – and a loving memory that will never forget what God has done.

Psalm 105 “Remember his marvellous works which he hath done; his wonders, and the judgments of his mouth …”

Psalm 103 Bless the LORD, my soul; do not forget all the gifts of God, Who pardons all your sins, heals all your ills, Delivers your life from the pit, surrounds you with love and compassion

 

[OTavern]

Ok, I’ll have to disagree with you here. I believe the Holy See’s Congregation for the Causes of Saints would disagree as well – as would the Lourdes Medical Bureau. The value of miracles has a very lasting value and benefit.

I never doubted the value of miracles, but simply that they must be kept in perspective. They are only valuable if they lead to “knowing and loving” God more fully, not for their power to merely “overwhelm” witnesses.

In any case, the Congregation works very hard at doubting and disproving miracles. Their main task is to “dismiss what happened” so to speak – even in cases where the miraculous event seems indubitable. Does that mean the “questioning” and doubting attitude of the Congregation is, according to your standards, showing “bad faith,” confusion and ingratitude, as well?

Why is the Congregation allowed to question or doubt whether a miracle actually occurred or not, but our friend drpmjhess is taken to task, by you, for ingratitude and bad faith when he simply and sincerely questions if and why an overwhelming event in his life was miraculous or not?

 

[drpmjhess]

That is not what I understood drpmjhess to mean. He was simply struggling with “why” God would do what clearly seemed like a miracle in his son’s case, but wondered why God would also not do the same for others who suffer different endings to similar events. Why does God seem to treat equal needs and worths so radically different?

Again, this was not the way I read his post, just the opposite in fact. His statements were those of “wondering” if moral worthiness or other considerations made any difference at all in why God brings about miracles because they didn’t seem to in his case. “The people in China had no less a moral claim to a miracle than his son so why were they not spared?” was the question being asked.

Precisely right, OTavern. I like the Latin sense of “miracle” – miraculum, or little thing at which we marvel or wonder. Too ready a sensationalized trafficking in miracles cheapens their value, My uncle worked for a division of the US Bureau of Customs. He lives in New Jersey, and his office was in the World Trade Center, but he didn’t go in early on September 11 because he had a dentist appointment. His son (my cousin) did not know that, and watched the first tower collapse, not knowing his father was not inside. The family is quiet about this, immensely grateful of course but quiet. In the face of the loss and grief of so many families who were not fortunate, rejoicing in “miraculous” intervention through a dentist appointment, a blown radiator, a traffic jam, would seem obscene.

What can one say that is not simply absurd, about God choosing to save this person but not that one, or punishing this company but not that one? Anything can be miraculous, even the mundane and ordinary – life itself is a miracle. The birth of my two sons was a miraculous experience, although medically explicable. A friend of mine was saved from self-destruction in a life of alcohol dependency by an event that in every detail was explicable naturalistically, and yet that at the same time was so extraordinary it changed her life forever. That was a miracle in ordinary!

Petrus

 

[wildleafblower]

Here’s a humdinger. Figure it out. On Monday of this week I intended to resume a long overdue discussion with Vern Humphrey pertaining to our love for horses on another topic but first zoomed through other topics that I had participated in, which after reading caused me a degree of distress. Shaking my head with disbelief by what people had wrote, I was miffed and beside myself, wondering why in the ‘world of words’ does constant discontent, negativity, lack of respect and truth posture itself amidst our so-called “civilized” society. In my moment of utter dismay I turned off my computer then, out of the blue, my mind was drawn to the material that was given to me last year when I discovered, while driving a long stretch of road in Illinois, a large steeple poking out of a hedge of huge trees. As I drove the winding road skyward I came upon a convent for the Sisters of the Adorers of the Blood of Christ. My four hours with them was well spent. They were a delight, extremely courteous and polite. And I was made to feel like I was at home with them, feeling absolutely encircled by their love for Jesus. Upon my departure they gave me a large volume of literature about Saint Maria DeMattias, the foundress of the Congregation of the Adorers of the Blood of Christ.

And so my story goes, I began to immediately read on Monday the **Prayer in Time of Special Need **asking Saint Maria De Mattias to help me, explaining my earnest concerns and hoping that joy would return after which I opened for the first time one of the books given to me entitled **What Love Can Do **(A biography of Maria De Mattias). It was page 40 that I flipped to entitled The Mystic on Muleback with a photograph on page 41 of her on a mule. My mind raced thinking about Vern and what I believe to be now as our predestined discussion about horses! (I’m indebted to Vern. God Bless You!) From those two pages:

“The sixty-two convents that Maria opened throughout Italy continued to make their demands on her. The Sisters were still learning the rudiments of religious life and needed her guidance and encouragement. Moreover, as was the custom of times, many of the women who joined Maria had never learned to read or write. They lacked also the professional qualifications that were needed for the responsibilities assigned to them. Maria had to provide for their total formation. She struggled constantly with her desire to fill the spiritual hunger of those requesting the services of her Sisters and her awareness of the Sister’s need for on-going formation.

“It is little wonder, then, that Maria most often found herself on the back of a mule or with a pen in her hand as the Congregation expanded. She traveled the narrow trails throughout the mountainous regions of central Italy giving support and encouragement to the early Adorers and to the people of the small towns where they served. The 1, 362 letters preserved in the archives of the Congregation testify to the fact that she continually reached out to them also with hastily written words of exhortation and loving concern.”

On Tuesday I hiked with a dear friend of mine. Afterwards we decided to visit a craft store. As I stepped out of my vehicle a shiny object on the ground caught my attention. I quickly picked it up; tossing it into my purse, thinking the necklace was a piece of costume jewelry. During lunch we examined it, and my friend thought it was the real thing, mentioning that I shouldn’t be concerned about turning it in since her husband is a police officer who has told her before that you don’t turn in jewelry. Well, low and behold, I took the necklace to my jeweler and truth is the necklace is a 14K WHITE GOLD DIAMOND CIRCLE OF LOVE PENDANT with 31 little diamonds. In fine print on the chain and necklace the words Italy. It’s from Italy! So I’m going to keep the necklace. If someone sees it around my neck while I’m about town and mentions she lost one like it then I will pass the CIRCLE OF LOVE back to her or if I loose it, hopefully the CIRCLE OF LOVE will continue it’s life with another woman filled with profound joy!

P.S. A sincere heartfelt thank you to Vern Humphrey. I’ll be sure to visit you and yours next time I’m in Arkansas, a piece of heaven on earth where the laughing horses roam. I’m sending you a private message. Normally, I turn off that function.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all.