Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles  (Read 32058 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #60 on: December 17, 2022, 02:24:24 PM »


I know one might protest "yes, Satan could engineer all of that".  Two thoughts then: (a) we have made Satan almost as omnipotent, almost as omniscient, as Almighty God Himself.  Indeed, a friend of mine in college (Jєωιѕн, BTW) said "you Christians make it almost as though there were two Gods, one good, one evil".  Satan is neither omnipotent nor omniscient --- of a higher intelligence than any human, true, with angelic powers that no human has, true, but even with this conceded, he's not a god. (b) non-Catholic apologists of the Jack Chick variety (and those more cultured and erudite than Jack Chick was) could then come back and say "yes, and your older miracles, such as Lanciano, are of Satanic origin as well, ditto for Fatima, ditto for the liquefied blood of St Januarius, ditto for all your so-called 'miracles', and WRT your apparitions, Satan can indeed manifest as an 'angel of light' ".  Then we're thrown back onto the argument of "if miracles buttress the contentions of traditional Catholics, then they're true, but if they bring one to other conclusions, then they're false".  I hate to say it, but that's not the strongest argument in the world.  Far from it.



Simple Man,


Which is why I say, if they are miracles, in the context of a disputed rite of questionable validity (the context Sean seems to be missing), they are a sign of the NO's validity, and - until I hear of miracles at a valid but illicit Orthodox or other valid liturgies - indicate that the priests and bishops who worship via the NO are true priests and bishops of the Catholic Church and their worship should not be avoided if there is not another place of fitting worship via the TLM available. 



Quote
I've had to wonder, then, if eucharistic miracles in the Novus Ordo can be seen this way --- yes, the Novus Ordo is valid, it confects the Body and Blood of Christ, and post-Vatican II priestly and episcopal orders are valid (because you have to have those for the Mass to be valid, unless you manage to get a pre-V2 priest to offer it), but that does not mean it was good to make those changes, and the Novus Ordo clearly has many, many other problems besides questions of validity.  The whole traditionalist argument (or set of arguments) does not collapse like a cake when the oven door is slammed, or like a house of cards, if one accepts the validity of the NOM and post-V2 orders, and if those things are proved, that does not mean that we all have to run off to the Novus Ordo and abandon the TLM.

Ok, but, as I suggested above,  I think it does cause to collapse like a house of cards the argument that the NO is "offensive to God and harmful to souls," at least to the extent that so it should be avoided as inherently evil or whatever the SSPX used to say and could not be resorted to to satisfy the Sunday obligation.   



Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #61 on: December 17, 2022, 02:29:11 PM »
Apples and oranges.

Indeed.  The Ottaviani Intervention states it flatly rejects the Catholic theology of Sacrifice as laid out at Trent.  And Pope Saint Paul VI's very definition in calling it the Lord's Supper - specifically Protestant terminology for a specifically Protestant event - showed amply what it is not (Roman Catholic). 

Citing a docuмent released by the Head of the Holy Office, however, that references the Council of Trent, is 'babbling' according to Sean.


Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #62 on: December 17, 2022, 03:55:43 PM »
Question for all here.

Say someone who has grown up on the novus ordo doesn't know what all the fuss is about. He/she doesn't frequent internet Catholic forums. He/she have never been to a Latin Mass and may or may not have one nearby. He/she doesn't know anyone who assists the TLM.

The person does have faith, has a strong devotion to Mary, understands the necessity of being in a state of grace to receive Communion, and follows all the precepts of the Church. The person has trusted the Church all their lives and sees their role as a layman requires obedience and trust in the clergy unless an obvious scandal is involved.

The person dies in a state of grace.

The question... Are they going to be damned because the NO is the only Mass they have ever known ? With Our Lord telling them "sorry, but you trusted the wolves" ?






Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #63 on: December 18, 2022, 05:13:00 AM »
Question for all here.

Say someone who has grown up on the novus ordo doesn't know what all the fuss is about. He/she doesn't frequent internet Catholic forums. He/she have never been to a Latin Mass and may or may not have one nearby. He/she doesn't know anyone who assists the TLM.

The person does have faith, has a strong devotion to Mary, understands the necessity of being in a state of grace to receive Communion, and follows all the precepts of the Church. The person has trusted the Church all their lives and sees their role as a layman requires obedience and trust in the clergy unless an obvious scandal is involved.

The person dies in a state of grace.

The question... Are they going to be damned because the NO is the only Mass they have ever known ? With Our Lord telling them "sorry, but you trusted the wolves" ?
Where did the person get their faith - from the NO religion? I don't think so because the virtues you grant the hypothetical person are not taught within the NO religion - it is in fact utterly adverse to their lex orandi lex credendi.

Which is to say that you are describing an impossible hypothetical, but if it were possible that such a person existed, God, if seeing the person would cooperate with the graces, would give the person all the graces necessary to leave the NO, get themself completely out of that situation and direct them to the True faith and Mass.....just as He has done for the rest of us who reject the NO religion for the true faith.
  
Very simply, if God arranged for you to know the truth, it is by the very same Providence that He can arrange for anyone else seeking it to know the truth. God has no need of the internet to do this.

Re: Claimed Eucharistic Miracles
« Reply #64 on: December 18, 2022, 06:55:31 AM »
Indeed.  The Ottaviani Intervention states it flatly rejects the Catholic theology of Sacrifice as laid out at Trent.  And Pope Saint Paul VI's very definition in calling it the Lord's Supper - specifically Protestant terminology for a specifically Protestant event - showed amply what it is not (Roman Catholic). 

Citing a docuмent released by the Head of the Holy Office, however, that references the Council of Trent, is 'babbling' according to Sean.

Status disputationis:

1) It was shown, contrary to your contention, that the purpose of a Eucharistic Miracle has nothing to do with God endorsing a liturgical rite, but (per St. Thomas) to promote belief in the Real Presence;

2) You attempted to evade that necessary conclusion by contending that the NOM was not a “Catholic rite” (conflating that term with “Catholic theology”) to conclude that St. Thomas does not apply;

3) After directing you to the CE to show you that a Catholic Rite, as that term is understood by the Church, is nothing more than prayers and ceremonies received and approved by the pope for use in the Church, I further pointed to the example of Archbishop Lefebvre (who led the steering committee on the irrelevant Ottaviani Intervention you keep pointing to) acknowledging that a Catholic can satisfy his Sunday obligation by attending a NOM (a position he could not have taken, we’re the rite not Catholic). 

I further pointed out the exceeding unlikelihood that Lefebvre simply didn’t know what a Catholic rite was, or that he would say Catholics could fulfill their Sunday obligations by attending a non-Catholic rite.

4) The gratuitous and irrational response of your sedevacantist allies was not a theological response, but a statement of fact: that Lefebvre was simply wrong (an assertion without a demonstration).

Because you lack clear thinking, you have conflated a number of indistinct ideas and impressions to arrive at your erroneous position, and resolved a priori to fend off any argument -with willfulness rather than doctrinal argumentation- to the contrary.

I conclude by repeating that your mind lacks the precision to mettle in these matters, but because your mind perceives that assessment as an insult, your pride is triggered, leading to your ignorant obstinacy.

Well, I leave you to it.