Scepticism about John Paul II's miracle

  • Thread starter Thread starter M_Hains
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It did not take long for the sceptics (you get more coverage in Holy Week): timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris//article1615600.ece?Submitted=true

I made some politic comments. If you have a few minutes, there is an opportunity for some apologetics.šŸ‘
The guy is a typical angry atheist unwilling to accept anything he himself can’t experience. So that would make his worldview rather limited of course and narrowminded. Anyways its to be expected in the secular media. What I found even more sad was some comments elsewhere on the worldwide web from protestants that such miracles where phoney and that they should get non-catholic doctors to look at the nun. This is utter ignorance the Vatican has all sort of doctors from non-catholic backgrounds to check the miraclles precisely to make sure their is no agenda here. It is the same with Lourdes and it secular doctors who check for miralcles and see no other explanation than the miraculous. Silly protestants you should have more faith in Jesus listening to the pleas of his best friends but they don’t find Jesus listening to his best friends in heaven in their theology his best friends are explaned to me as dead oh but the Bible says they are every alive and have the beautific vision of our Lord.
 
From the article…
Where are you, intelligent Christians? Where is your voice, your righteous anger? Where is your honest contempt for this nonsense? Take that claimed recent miracle, for instance. I know lots of nice, clever Catholics — friends, thoughtful men and women, people of depth and subtlety, people of some delicacy, people who would surely cringe at the excesses of Lourdes. Do they believe that John Paul II may have cured this nun from beyond the grave?
SO…smart Catholics do not believe in the intercession of Saints?

LOL…this made me chuckle honestly…
 
Such faith sounds so reasonable. Churlish nonbelievers like me are made to feel it is we who are being arrogant, dogmatic, closed-minded.
…
I think they know this stuff is the petrol on which the motor of a great Church runs; that without these delusions to feed on, the unthinking masses would falter.
When he asks himself, ā€œBut how can you be sure?ā€ The only answer he can come up with ā€œMere language does no justice to my certainty.ā€

It sounds arrogant, dogmatic and close-minded. This is why atheism is in the decline.
 
I think scepticism is a good sign. I for one would encourage it. The case for sainthood is only made stronger when it makes its way through a gauntlet of doubt. This is a cause for joy, not alarm.

Nohome
 
I think scepticism is a good sign. I for one would encourage it. The case for sainthood is only made stronger when it makes its way through a gauntlet of doubt. This is a cause for joy, not alarm.

Nohome
Skepticism is good downright dismission is another thing and this guy is in the latter category.
 
When that happens there will be more nasty arguments by secular humanist as to why St John Paul is just catholic superstition.
Why are you troubled by critics of the Church? They have always been here and always will. If they didn’t percieve the Church as a threat, they would ignore it. These nasty arguments only fortify the Church. Didn’t Jesus promise this?

Nohome
 
I couldn’t believe all the hate coming from the comments section.

After considering it, I think Nohome may be right. If the Church did not have such a positive influence, there would be no need of sceptics.
 
If the criticism can be rebutted, then what’s the problem? We come out stronger (and those who remain critical look like fools). But if it cannot (in this case, that is very unlikely since secular doctors will have examined the situation) then we need to take a good hard look at ourselves. That is the purpose (for us) of this criticism. Don’t worry about it- just rebut it.
 
Why are you troubled by critics of the Church? They have always been here and always will. If they didn’t percieve the Church as a threat, they would ignore it. These nasty arguments only fortify the Church. Didn’t Jesus promise this?

Nohome
Jesus did not say do not be troubled and ignore the persectution. He said there would be persecution he did not say enjoy it or ignore it, what troubles me is not the nasty atheist who say such thing but the influence they have on our weaker brethrne who take this stuff with more seriousness than it deserves. I mean just how many fallen away catholics do we all know. I know many and I think most of us know many.
 
From the article…

SO…smart Catholics do not believe in the intercession of Saints?

LOL…this made me chuckle honestly…
Hahahaha. Wow, I guess my 4.0 straight A average is a fluke then, seeing as how I pray the rosary devoutly.
 
It did not take long for the sceptics (you get more coverage in Holy Week): timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris//article1615600.ece?Submitted=true

I made some politic comments. If you have a few minutes, there is an opportunity for some apologetics.šŸ‘
The answer to both of the author’s title questions is a sure and certain NO. Of course it has to be no.

Firstly it is NOT John Paul’s miracle. The late great Pope did not work it. It is a miracle worked by the merciful goodness of Almighty God through John Paul II’s intercession.

Secondly remember for those who believe no miracle is necessary. For those who do not, no miracle is ever enough.

We know what side we are on!! šŸ˜‰
 
I am extremely skeptical of any miracles attributed to any ā€œintercession of the saintsā€. The saints do not intercede for us. They are alive in Christ but they do not have the power to hear our prayers.
 
It did not take long for the sceptics (you get more coverage in Holy Week): timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris//article1615600.ece?Submitted=true

I made some politic comments. If you have a few minutes, there is an opportunity for some apologetics.šŸ‘
Frankly, I too am somewhat skeptical of these miracles. People confuse popularity of the previous Pope with sainthood. I have very mixed feelings about John Paul…and did not find him a beacon of hope for the Church. His heresies distressed me as a Catholic.
 
Frankly, I too am somewhat skeptical of these miracles. People confuse popularity of the previous Pope with sainthood. I have very mixed feelings about John Paul…and did not find him a beacon of hope for the Church. His heresies distressed me as a Catholic.
What heresies did Pope John Paul II have in your opinion?
 
I am extremely skeptical of any miracles attributed to any ā€œintercession of the saintsā€. The saints do not intercede for us. They are alive in Christ but they do not have the power to hear our prayers.
Why don’t you believe in the communion of saints, Holly? Why do you think they cannot hear our prayers?
 
Tthe most shameful, for me, was the Vicar of Christ praying with pagans and heretics at his meetings…and kow-towing to Muslims.
Jesus ate and drank with sinners, healed Gentiles, and talked with prositutes. I think the Vicar of Christ can pray with non catholics. Pope John Paul ll made peace with other religions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top