No stigmata for 1200 years?

[Ceil-1]

My observations have been that people who tend to be lukewarm and not as holy pooh-pooh mystical phenomenon.

People who tend to be more firm in their faith, holy and committed to God understand mystical phenomenon, and welcome them as signal graces of God.

Check You Tube out (The Miracle of Damascus, for instance, for video taped evidence of mystical phenomenon. Study the attributes of those who demonstrate it. Then, convict yourselves for not being nearly as devoted to God as they are.)

BTW, those who know anything at all about Padre Pio know certain of his superiors all but fell over themselves trying to disprove these Stigmata /phenomena and prove him a fraud. One was so rabid about it they made him resign from the investigation for obvious malice. In the end, Padre Pio was vindicated. We know what skeptics dwell in the upper eschalons of the Church. If they couldn’t discount what this man did, no one can. It is best not to discount what the Church has officially investigated and found irreproachable. That is not subjecting ourselves to the authority of the Church.

For all that, what is the definition and signs of holiness? What is it that makes us holy?

 

[FrancisBenedict]

Only Grace makes us Holy, faith and good works is as far as we can go to it I personally believe.

Pax+

 

[Classicist]

Ceil-1, I am not as holy as others, and I am a lukewarm sinner. Tell me something I don’t know ! - but please try to stay on the topic of the Stigmata itself, rather than bring into questions of the motives of other posters.

bsroufek, I do not act or think as an unbeliever. The greatest mysteries of all - the blessed Trinity, the Incarnation, etc. - have my assent. Merely doubting about one thing does not make someone an “unbeliever”.

I think you are looking for excuses NOT to believe in the miracles of the stigmata, which Christ obviously gave us to REMIND us of His passion.

Is this not an example of inordinate zeal for the stigmata? The Fathers for 1200 years had a reminder of the holy Passion of Christ before their eyes daily - the Holy Mass. I am worried about the origin of stigmata precisely because it’s unnecessary. We know what must be done “In Remembrance of Me”. It’s easy to become beguiled by “signs and wonders”.

The Lord told Thomas that faith is more blessed than sight. I’d rather people be blessed than that they search out for great signs - for “a wicked generation asks for a sign”. I am not accusing Francis or Padre Pio of anything - but merely asking Catholics to examine their motives and why they believe things. 1200 years is a very long time for such an apparently necessary sign to never be known by anyone; after all, private stigmata defeats the very purpose for which people say the stigmata exists.

 

[bsroufek]

… after all, private stigmata defeats the very purpose for which people say the stigmata exists.

There is redemptive suffering, as Pope John Paul II writes. So, in having the “private” stigmata, these saints were participating in the Redemption of all mankind. They were making a continuous sacrifice in their suffering of the stigmata for the sake of sinners.

 

[InJesusItrust]

Well, can I drill holes in people’s hands by showing an emotional movie? This sounds like moving the goal posts and not objective thinking to me.

 

[Classicist]

There is redemptive suffering, as Pope John Paul II writes. So, in having the “private” stigmata, these saints were participating in the Redemption of all mankind. They were making a continuous sacrifice in their suffering of the stigmata for the sake of sinners.

Redemptive suffering is real, but taking it to the degree that you literally try to do everything Jesus Christ did in His unique ministry of salvation… it seems blasphemous to me. After all, who needs Christ if we have Francis and Padre Pio, with their holy wounds? The theology may not say this, but popular folklore often takes the place of theology when it comes to public piety. Do you see my concern, or is this just totally alien for you?

Isaiah 42 contains the admonition: “I am THE LORD, it is my name; I shall not share my glory with another”

Look at the unique glory of God - who was incarnate and suffered to redeem us. Stigmata seem to be most unfitting, given that Christ is YHWH Himself, and His glory has been manifested uniquely in dying and rising for humanity. What a grand, majestic truth - and He does not share it with any other, for He alone has done this.

Well, can I drill holes in people’s hands by showing an emotional movie? This sounds like moving the goal posts and not objective thinking to me.

Unfortunately, some of us are all-too-aware of the real effects of psychogenic emotional states which create actual physical maladies. Easily-ruptured skin, bodies weak from fasting, and intense emotion (i.e. the actual wish to have the stigmata, in Francis’ case) can do a lot to change our bodies. Maybe God used this very physical tendency in us to create the miracle in the stigmatists. I don’t know. I’m just putting it forward.

Pan my neutrality and objectivity if you want. I don’t mind.

 

[bsroufek]

After all, who needs Christ if we have Francis and Padre Pio, with their holy wounds? The theology may not say this, but popular folklore often takes the place of theology when it comes to public piety. Do you see my concern, or is this just totally alien for you?

St. Paul says that Jesus suffered as the Head and we suffer as the Body. Suffering is BOTH that of Christ and his Church. [St. Paul’s wounds (not the stigmata but received blows from stoning and other attacks) are detailed in the Bible.]

To answer your question, as I understand it, God has chosen certain people to be martyrs and others to suffer redemptively with great sanctity. “Be Holy for I am Holy”, “Be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect.” They have their sanctity, not of themselves, but from God. So who are you to throw it away?

 

[FrancisBenedict]

St Francis and St Padre Pio were following Christ.

What is wrong in wanting to follow Christ as closely as possible except that we cannot go where he went? But to follow Christ for the love of God is an act of love.

Helping those in need might be a more practical help but how can we condemn others for loving Christ so much they want to live the same life for love of him?

Pax+

 

[InJesusItrust]

Again, can we drill holes in bodies by our thoughts? Has this been demonstrated or it just an extrapolation from unsimilar observations?

 

[FrancisBenedict]

The stigmata is not what matters in the end, the Faith is, surely?

 

[bsroufek]

The stigmata is not what matters in the end, the Faith is, surely?

I can’t imagine God saying, “Oh, that doesn’t matter.” Jesus said, “Not even a sparrow hits the ground without the Father’s knowledge”. Everything matters.

The stigmata are very important, contrary to your dismissal of them.

 

[FrancisBenedict]

I can’t imagine God saying, “Oh, that doesn’t matter.” Jesus said, “Not even a sparrow hits the ground without the Father’s knowledge”. Everything matters.

The stigmata are very important, contrary to your dismissal of them.

Maybe I chose my words wrong. I didn’t mean they don’t matter I meant what matters more in the end.

I didn’t mean to dismiss what happened to two of the most important saints ever for me.

Pax+

 

[bsroufek]

Maybe I chose my words wrong. I didn’t mean they don’t matter I meant what matters more in the end.

I didn’t mean to dismiss what happened to two of the most important saints ever for me.

Pax+

Sorry to misunderstand you. Basically, I recall some who say that visions and mystical experiences and miracles are not to be expected. But, when they do happen, we should appreciate them, in my opinion.

Of course, what matters most in the end is Faith, but God’s actions should be reverenced is what I mean to say. If Jesus didn’t retain the marks on His Body, St. Thomas might night have believed. So it is that there are those who need miracles to believe.

Using the OP argument, any Catholic Doctrine that wasn’t developed in the first 1000 years of the Church must mean that it isn’t needed. Jesus said the end time would be “a time of distress” worse than has ever happened or will ever happen again. So, as evil increases, we may need even more miracles and stigmata signs than ever.

 

[MarcoPolo]

It simply strikes me as odd that not one case is recorded for the first millennium; then we have Francis, and suddenly it’s the “In Thing” to claim to be conformed to Christ so fully that you have the very wounds with which He saved us.

Permit me if you will, to run with this perspective. Could one not say “why now” regarding the Incarnation? After thousands of years of wandering in deserts and wars and sacrifices, why did God suddenly choose a particular time? Why was Jesus suddenly the “in thing” when God had already revealed Himself in so many ways? If it was to make atonement for man, why then and not earlier? Why, why, why?

There’s so much ill that has come from the focus, the need to see the wounds in people other than Christ. We must see them on Christ uniquely, by faith. We should not need these things in creatures.

I wonder about this because only Christ has redeemed: only Christ has led captivity captive, conquering death by death. Great suffering, holiness, and glory were shown by generations of saints before stigmata ever became prominent.

IF the stigmata is a divine sign, then why would we attempt to belittle it and presume a miracle manifested in a saint is something “other than Christ.” The manifested miracle helps us see the unseen miracles in other saints, does it not? If all you are doing is cautioning against obsession with a miracle as something alien to God’s work, then perhaps we can all agree.

FYI, the Church typically takes painstaking efforts to verify miracles, whether it be the several doctors who examined Padre Pio’s hands, or the dating processes applied to the Shroud of Turin, or an exorcist working in conjunction with a psychologist, the Church is well-aware of scientific phenomena that could resemble a miracle. Be at ease that the Church has the same concerns that you do.

 

[Semangelof]

We know through Jesus’s words, and ST. John of the Cross that invisible faith is preferable. We also know many came to Christ through the witness of His miracles. Both are clearly food for the Christian soul.

Invisible faith is preferable, and a great faith it provides. But we also need faith with action, whether it be miracles of the hidden heart, or more explicit miracles like stigmata and healing. All of us, who call ourselves Christians, are at the very least a private witness to the miracle of the heart. We all came to Christ through a miracle.

To simply rely on pure invisible faith threatens to stagnate our faith where it should move to miraculous action. We need to be eating both, preferring invisible faith as our foundation and contemplation, and miracles to edify our own faith into action.

 

[Goya]

Yes what matters is faith, good works and the grace of God, not exterior signs.

Padre Pio was a Good man and a Saint who was embarrassed by the stigmata. Don’t believe that? Look at the fruits of his life, look at the increase in faith & all that he has done in the world directly and indirectly.

Pax +

Weren’t there also many miracles attributed to him, such that people would line of for hours, for Confession with him, from all over the world? And wouldn’t he hear confessions for up to 16 hours a day?

I don’t think those thousands of people came to see the stigmata, as if to see some carni-freak show; they came to witness a Saint, a man of devout Faith, to seek to touch the devine–as they continue to visit Lourdes, Gudalupe, and Fatima, and so many saints (e.g.–St. Francis) before him, and Mother Theresa, most recently.

It’s usually a tell-tale. Yes, many saints live in obscurity–but so many are also immediately recognized as Saints, and folks flock to them, to ‘touch the devine’. Catch a glimpse; partake somehow with divinity.

Padre Pio was embarrassed of the stigmata, for the same reason St. Peter asked to be crucified upside down–he did not feel worthy to bear the wounds of our Lord.

Padre Pio wasn’t some television preacher with charisma and glowing smiles–he was the real deal. He was a sincerely humble Saint. And the Faithful recognized it.

The flash and dimples, and charisma…all that is transparent. Folks see through that. But true devout faith, is tested and tested, over and over again, exposed to scruitiny, attempted to be exposed as fraud, but rather is constantly ‘steeled’ and confirmed as the real deal. Such was Padre Pio’s faith–and that’s what attracted folks from all over the globe, for decades…

FWIW.

 

[Goya]

Invisible faith is preferable??? What?

Are we not called to LIVES OF CHARITY???

Are we called upon to hide our charity from the world???

To bear witness to the Faith in private???

To forgo gathering as community in worship (i.e.–Mass), in favor of praying in private?

There is certainly a place and need for the ‘interior life’–but it is for the fulfillment of our public lives–lives of FAITH. We are called upon to bring forth Christ into the world, through our thoughts, words and actions–and that is not accomplished by bringing Him in…and then suffocating Him–rather it is done AFTER bringing Him in (i.e.–after the Eucharist)–hence the Mass is concluded with a charge to ‘go forth and announce the Gospel of the Lord’ (Ite ad Evangelium Domini nuntiandum), or ‘go in peace, glorifying the Lord by your life’ (Ite in pace, glorificando vita vestra Dominum), or the like.

 

[Semangelof]

Invisible faith is preferable??? What?

What I mean is faith without signs. As in “blessed is he who has not seen but believed”. Not that we should make our beliefs invisible and hidden. This is why I say we need miracles to edify our faith toward the same acts.

 

[Bookcat]

No stigmata for 1200 years? Sure.

And I would not put Paul in with the who received the Stigmata.

Yes – it seems the first to receive this extraordinary grace was St Francis.

That should not surprise us. God knows what gifts to give and when.

But it is not “per se” a conclusive sign of holiness.

And absolutely – *who have lived by grace a heroic sanctity *-- have not received that particular unusual grace.

Are there authentic stigmata as well as that which is “in-authentic”? sure.

Such has been a subject studied in Spiritual Theology.

Why do many find such moving? Due to the extraordinary nature of such.

Such “extraordinary gifts” can even be given to those not yet of “heroic sanctity” …They are not pre se indications of holiness.

 

[Holly3278]

And in Padre Pio’s case, it might be something else indeed. Did you read those reports last year about how he might have used carbolic acid to self-inflict the wounds?

Someone else started a big thread on CAF at the time about it.
The info was based on a document found in the Vatican archives–testimony from Pio’s pharmacist from whom he ordered the acid and then, according to the pharmacist, Pio told her to keep the order secret.

A bit fishy…
.

Do you think that the Church would canonize someone who was in the habit of lying?