Using miracles in apologetics

[anon50218184]

Why do you think this is not what I observed by the words “reasonable claim”?

Could you please elaborate? It seems from this question that you are in tacit agreement with my claim that miracles can be a valuable tool in discussing the truths of the Faith.

What is the topic of this thread, miracles or Eucharistic miracles? You wrote that surely?

Nor am I aware of any EM resulting in mass conversions.

As I mentioned earlier, I’m making use of Eucharistic Miracles as an example of distinctly Catholic supernatural phenomena.

Guadalupe is not a Eucharistic miracle.

I brought up Our Lady of Guadalupe precisely because it is a non-Eucharistic miracle, partially in response to your statement:

"you did not confine yourself to “Eucharistic miracles”.

Nor am I aware of any EM resulting in mass conversions.

The miracle at Lanciano is one such miracle.

 

[BlackFriar]

I really have no idea what you are objecting to re what I observe about wonders in general.

Re Lanciano…I suggest that a superstitious population would join any new belief system/culture that worked a great wonder regardless of origin or understood content if they had nothing to lose and everything to gain by doing so.

 

[anon50218184]

[…]If different belief systems are both supported by wonders[…]

At this point one would have to test how compelling the “wonders” or miracles are.

If different belief systems are both supported by wonders then perhaps the wonders have nothing directly to do with supporting the belief system at all.

If a miracle is presented as evidence, then it would support a truth claim.

Maybe it simply proves the strength of conviction or holiness of the person in question whatever their beliefs may be.

I believe that yes, among other things, miracles are a testament to the witnesses’ faith.

 

[anon50218184]

I really have no idea what you are objecting to re what I observe about wonders in general.

What does your observation imply?

 

[BlackFriar]

Which means wonders are useful for gaining adherents to any belief system, but no belief system in particular.
So yes, it is my experience they serve an apologetic purpose…but not merely a Catholic one.

 

[anon50218184]

So yes, it is my experience they serve an apologetic purpose…but not merely a Catholic one.

Exactly, so the question you’re approaching is “how compelling is the evidence”

Incidentally, you also wrote

My experience is that other belief systems make similar claims. So such claims would serve little apologetic purpose if any.

I wonder why you chose to use the qualifier “little if any” but that’s beside the point.

 

[BlackFriar]

Exactly, so the question you’re approaching is “how compelling is the evidence”

You still seem to believe the evidence for Catholic wonders is more compelling than that for wonders outside of Catholicism. If I am mistaken in understanding you do let me know.

I have experienced no evidence of that myself.
But what I have experienced is that true believers of anything often think their case is more compelling than that of outsiders.

Which seems much the same as my original observations:

“As miracles are to be found outside of Catholicism and indeed of Christianity it is difficult to see what particular apologetic purpose they might have.”

“…other mass institutions can validly claim wonders that also support their belief system?”

“… only the Catholic Church can lay a reasonable claim to miracles[?]”

 

[anon50218184]

I don’t understand. I thought we had come to an agreement.

So yes, it is my experience they serve an apologetic purpose…

Now it appears you’re backtracking. What gives?

 

[De_Maria]

You still seem to believe the evidence for Catholic wonders is more compelling than that for wonders outside of Catholicism. If I am mistaken in understanding you do let me know.

I do. Can you point to one non-Catholic miracle which is as compelling as the evidence for the appearance of Our Lady of Guadalupe, for example?

 

[De_Maria]

What is the topic of this thread, miracles or Eucharistic miracles? You wrote that surely?
Guadalupe is not a Eucharistic miracle.
Nor am I aware of any EM resulting in mass conversions.

One is a subset of the other. The thread is about miracles. Eucharistic miracles are part of that larger set.

 

[ANewBeginning]

Miracles are not for unbelievers or the hard hearted. They are for the Faithful, or for those who are open to the Holy Spirit (with the Miracle being merely the final flourish in the Grace of God coming into their life).

I think using Miracle stories are not helpful in evangelizing. In fact, in some instances they can be harmful.

 

[BlackFriar]

Great. So back to my original statement:
“You do not accept that other mass institutions can validly claim wonders that also support their belief system?”

It seems unhelpful to say that mine is bigger than yours, that one group’s alleged wonders are greater than another’s - therefore the lesser cannot be compelling in its own right.

Personally I have witnessed an amazing wonder at a Buddhist temple, I have never witnessed anything comparable in my 60 years as a committed Catholic. It doesn’t worry me at all. Wonders and miracles in my experience do not point to the exclusive truth of any group.

One is a subset of the other. The thread is about miracles.

The question was raised of the apologetic use of all miracles in general to point to the Catholic Church as somehow exclusively chosen by God. When a specific miracle for exemplifying this was mentioned it was Guadalupe…until I observed the likely weakness of that claim.

Now it appears you’re backtracking. What gives?

“wonders are useful for gaining adherents to any belief system, but no belief system in particular. So yes, it is my experience they serve an apologetic purpose…but not merely a Catholic one.”

 

[anon50218184]

What was the wonder at the Bhudist temple?

 

[De_Maria]

Personally I have witnessed an amazing wonder at a Buddhist temple, I have never witnessed anything comparable in my 60 years as a committed Catholic.

Here we go again. Please answer the direct question. What was the miracle? I’d like to see it to compare to one of the thousands of Catholic miracles and see whether it is truly more compelling.

 

[BlackFriar]

Here we go again. Please answer the direct question. What was the miracle? I’d like to see it to compare to one of the thousands of Catholic miracles and see whether it is truly more compelling.

May I kindly suggest this type of “apologetics” tone is unlikely to win you adherents to Christianity.

You have a knack for going off on the incidentals and ignoring the main chance. Which was my experience that:

“Wonders are useful for gaining adherents to any belief system, but no belief system in particular. So yes, it is my experience they serve an apologetic purpose…but not merely a Catholic one.”

I get it you disagree with my experience. Obviously one of us has broader knowledge and experience of cultures other than European Christianity.

We will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[De_Maria]

May I kindly suggest this type of “apologetics” tone is unlikely to win you adherents to Christianity…

Certainly. But I’m only asking you to reveal the nature of the miracle that you witnessed in order that I might compare to some Catholic miracle. Why is that offensive? Didn’t you compare that miracle to Catholic miracles when you said:

Personally I have witnessed an amazing wonder at a Buddhist temple, I have never witnessed anything comparable in my 60 years as a committed Catholic.

What was this amazing wonder?

 

[BlackFriar]

See post #35.
You are intellectually a young and still inexperienced fellow in this game so some friendly parting advice.
Anyone compulsed to force personal answers of people or have the last word will never make a good apologist.

God bless.

 

[De_Maria]

See post #35.
You are intellectually a young and still inexperienced fellow in this game so some friendly parting advice.

I venture that I have more experience than you at this “game”.

Anyone compulsed to force personal answers of people or have the last word will never make a good apologist.

Oh? I didn’t know you were making reference to a private revelation. I thought you were comparing a public miracle to one of the many public miracles that the Catholic Church has to offer. The miracles of Fatima, Guadalupe, Las Lazas, and Lanciano are not private. They have been witnessed by millions.

God bless.

And you, as well.

 

[godisgood77]

My personal preference is to not use miracles or private devotions/revelation in apologetics.

I would stick with revelation and the key tenets of the religion… in other words those things that all Catholics are obliged to believe. Miracles are always contested and do not have to be believed. Private revelation like Guadalupe or Fatima are not part of public revelation and do not have to be believed.

I would stick with the central beliefs and teachings as those are on the best, most solid foundation.

 

[anon50218184]

So, I just read this article this morning:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...70000-gathered-to-see/?utm_term=.b895f5f0889b

And it quotes Our Lady of Fatima saying:

“In October I will perform a miracle so that all may believe.”

I googled that quote and it seems to be an exact quote.

I understand the people might not want to accept a miracle as evidence, but it seems like that’s just because of hardness of heart.

And it’s not just Our Lady of Fatima who seems to think miracles are useful for gaining converts, think of the apostles, they often thought of themselves as “witnesses to the resurrection”. That was what they were proclaiming throughout the Mediterranean: Resurrexit sicut dixit!

I’m pretty convinced that miracles are a strong, even essential, tool in apologetics and to win converts. After all, that’s what people are asking for:
“Show me!”
“Where’s the evidence?”
“If God exists why doesn’t He perform miracles?”

The fact that people refuse to believe even after being presented with evidence betrays their closed mindedness (all things held equal - i.e. the apologist presented the evidence with patience, wisdom, and charity)

My vote is for “Yes, use miracles as evidence that the Catholic Faith is the One True Faith” That doesn’t mean “Use miracles exclusively.”