Miricles


#1

I had a thought that seems to me to be rather bright (though I am sure some of ya’ll can show me evidence to the contrary). One first major factors that went into my conversion was miricales (I was watching the movie Stigmata and it hit me that stuff like stigmata and the crying statues of mary happens) and anyhow I figured that it would be kind of useful to show protestants some of the Catholic Church miricales (kind of like testamony time that I hear fundamentalist do) so as to show that the Catholic Church isn’t this satanic demon organization in sheeps clothing. “What profith a man who has faith but, not works?” right? Does anyone know were I can go to find some authenticated miricales? You know the ones that the church has looked into (with all the scientist and ‘devils advocate’ stuff)? Any help would be appreciated. God bless.


#2

No clue but this one makes me suspicious a little.

visionsofjesuschrist.com/index.htm

Something like this?


#3

Montie,

You can check out the books by Joan Carroll Cruz

I especially like her book on EUCHARISTIC MIRACLES, and THE INCORRUPTIBLES

God Bless,
VC


#4

Okay, I’m just a foolish college student, so take everything I say with a grain of salt.

It seems to me though the only miracle we should need is Christ’s rising from the dead.

These miracles happen. Some of them are to console and strenghten the faithful, some are to bring souls to Christ, some are for reasons only He knows. But most of these are personal miracles.

Miracles are integral to our salvation. Every blessing, every sin forgiven, every grace bestowed, is a miracle. Limbs regenerating, statues crying, holy visions, are just not as easily explained ones.

In conclusion modern miracles are important personally, given to us for specific reasons, but it should be Christ’s eternal miracle, his passion, death, and ressurection that should be our focus.

Also the anti-christ will work great signs. We shouldn’t say look how right we are because of these wonderous signs. We can say this is the truth, and pray for a miracle and let God work it, but that is much different, thats letting God show them the sign. If we say we should be believed because of modern miracles, as if we can somehow call them down, if they arn’t a gift from God he bestows on us unworthy ones because of humble prayer, then we make it easier for people to be fooled by the anit-christ when they come if they use that logic.

The miracle of the Church is Christ’s incarnation, passion, death, ressurection, and ascention. These are what we need. God works miracles every day, but are these for the whole church or for specific people?

All in all miracles are amazing. He sent them to us for a reason, but I don’t think we should use them by saying, “here look at this miracle, we’re so right.” Rather if people convert becasue of miracles God will lead them to him through them, for that is what he intended.

Of course you have heard of the miracle at Fatima. I’m sure you have heard of Lanciano.

A quick google search reveals a whole host of recorded miracles.
katolik.nu/now/html/mirac.htm

Perhaps a book should be written soon.

Sorry, this post is really disjointed and scattered, but in that respects its like my thoughts.


#5

These are cool! :thumbsup:

holyfire.org/eng/
zeitun-eg.org/zeitoun1.htm


#6

[quote=Verbum Caro]Montie,

You can check out the books by Joan Carroll Cruz

I especially like her book on EUCHARISTIC MIRACLES, and THE INCORRUPTIBLES

God Bless,
VC
[/quote]

The books you mention by Joan Carrol Cruz are excellent Church-documented sources of God’s miracles. The book “The Incorruptibles” has photos of saints’ bodies that have lain incorrupt since their death many years (even centuries) ago. Highly recommended, as is Eucharistic Miracles. If a protestant will read and pray about the Eucharistic miracles, they just may be converted.


#7

Interesting you should say so because it was my husband telling me about a miracle that happened to him at age 13 that began my conversion process. I think the incorruptibles are good because you can show people pictures, and we all know what those are worth. Also maybe Fatima’s miracle of the sun. Most people have a hard time explaining that away. Don’t push too hard if you don’t immediately have success winning people over with this approach, though. Many people will not believe or will assume something even harder to believe like mass hallucinations. Some will say that it’s neat and not change. My husband fell away from practicing his faith for about 10 years (even though he knew it was the truth) even with the benefit of this. If you know alot of wiccans, though, it may prove quite effective. :slight_smile:


#8

someone who does not believe in Jesus Christ, who does not believe His promise and assurance that He is present in the Eucharist, is not going to believe the third-hand testimony of someone who has witnessed one of the so-called Eucharist miracles. I am quite sure some of them are genuine, but such a person who has already rejected the truth of Christ’s promise will not be convinced. Begin with the reality of Christ and His words and actions.


#9

[quote=puzzleannie]someone who does not believe in Jesus Christ, who does not believe His promise and assurance that He is present in the Eucharist, is not going to believe the third-hand testimony of someone who has witnessed one of the so-called Eucharist miracles. I am quite sure some of them are genuine, but such a person who has already rejected the truth of Christ’s promise will not be convinced. Begin with the reality of Christ and His words and actions.
[/quote]

While this could be one approach, there is nothing wrong with showing your protestant friends the miracles of the Eucharist. Montie, you said miracles were a deciding factor for you to come to the Catholic faith, and it may plant the seeds of faith for your friends as well. Should also give you a good opportunity to show why Catholics adore the Eucharist, that it’s not just a piece of bread.


#10

It’s been my experience that some evangelical protestants (I have in mind one very popular evengelical radio show host who is widely respected in the protestant community) imply that marian apparitions (and I’d assume other miracles) are in fact supernatural. They are just (as he puts it) “not from God”.

I don’t think miracles would win over too many protestants.

An interesting statistic to possibly pose to a protestant might be; it only takes one marian apparition, one eucharistic miracle, one stigmata such as Padrio Pio’s to have come from God to lend evidence towards proving Catholic doctrine. However ALL of the many many miracles documented and approved by the CC have to be either hallucinations, lies or demonic to lend evidence disproving Catholicism. Think of the long list of holy people who would have to be mentally unstable or liars for ALL miracles to be false miracles. If mentally unstable why is it the only part of thier life that exhibits this instability? If liars, what could possibly be the motive? Certainly not finacial gain. Certainly not fame. I don’t know how this evangelical radio host would answer this question. Calls to him, such as this, seem to be filtered out.


#11

[quote=Mijoy2]It’s been my experience that some evangelical protestants (I have in mind one very popular evengelical radio show host who is widely respected in the protestant community) imply that marian apparitions (and I’d assume other miracles) are in fact supernatural. They are just (as he puts it) “not from God”.

I don’t think miracles would win over too many protestants.

An interesting statistic to possibly pose to a protestant might be; it only takes one marian apparition, one eucharistic miracle, one stigmata such as Padrio Pio’s to have come from God to lend evidence towards proving Catholic doctrine. However ALL of the many many miracles documented and approved by the CC have to be either hallucinations, lies or demonic to lend evidence disproving Catholicism. Think of the long list of holy people who would have to be mentally unstable or liars for ALL miracles to be false miracles. If mentally unstable why is it the only part of thier life that exhibits this instability? If liars, what could possibly be the motive? Certainly not finacial gain. Certainly not fame. I don’t know how this evangelical radio host would answer this question. Calls to him, such as this, seem to be filtered out.
[/quote]

Thanks for the thought. I was going to use the scripture were Jesus had drove demons out of a person and people started to say that Jesus was driving demons out by belizbub and Jesus said that Satan couldn’t drive satan out and to say to the contrary would be blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Figureing that the CC has had plenty of exerisms performed and I could say, “Well here is irefutable evidence (scince only God could be behind such a thing) that God is with the Catholic Church” which would open the flood gates to the other miricales which would not only lay the “The Catholic Church is the Anti-Christ” bit to rest and it is “Testamony Time” for Montie. But, yours sounds better. Thanks.


#12

.


This is from the International Survivalist Society a secular Organization conjectureing on physical supernormal facts on a Lourdes inexplicable miracle.

Suppurating Fracture of the Leg. - Pierre de Rudder, who lived at Jabbeke, near Ostend, had his leg broken by a falling tree. Dr. Affenaer reduced the fracture and placed it in a starch splint, both bones being fractured and protruding through the skin. The flesh turned gangrenous, a large ulcer formed on the dorsal part of the foot, the wound was full of pus, and Dr. Vassanaere and others, called to a consultation, advised immediate amputation; to which the patient would not consent. About the middle of January Dr. Verriest again advised amputation, without effect. In April the patient was taken to the Grotto at Lourdes. There was a gap of over an inch between the ends of the bones and foul pus poured from the wound. Arrived at the Grotto he felt something happening as he rested on the seat. He knelt down and got up unaided, his leg resumed its normal size, the wounds healed up and the bones were solidly united. De Rudder then got up and walked without crutches to the omnibus which took him back to Ghent. The next day Dr. Affenaer came to visit him;
“he found the bones quite smooth at the scat of fracture, which was firmly united without any callus. The man lived for twenty-three years after, and during that time worked continually on his land without the least sign of fatigue or pain.”

“As this case excited an enormous amount of interest throughout Belgium, Dr. van Hoestenberghe, after De Rudder’s death, got permission to exhume the body, and he removed the bones of the legs, which are now in the possession of the Bishop of Bruges.”

These bones were photographed, right and left leg for comparison: the photograph shows deformity at the scat of the fracture, but perfect union of the bones; there is no shortening and only slight displacement from the straight. The medical gentleman who has so kindly brought this case to my special notice remarks:

How can we explain this case? We are confronted with the same difficulty as in the previous one. It is impossible to reject the direct evidence of so many competent medical men who examined the fracture both before and after the cure. Besides, we have the direct evidence of the united bones which were exhumed in the presence of a number of witnesses. We have no alternative but to admit the miraculous, although it goes dead against all our preconceived notions of the inviolability of natural laws to do so. Are we to believe that Nature’s laws can be set aside, or are we to reject all human testimony and the evidence of the bones themselves? Or may it be that the miracle is the result of some unknown law of the spiritual world? When Dr. Verriest examined the fracture three months before the cure, he stated that there was a separation of three centimetres (1 1/3 inches) between the two ends. In the centre of the wound two bony fragments could be seen, blackened and necrosed, and bathed in pus. To obtain a natural cure the necrosed ends would first have to be removed, and by that time the separation of the bones would have amounted to three inches or more. How was this cavity filled up? The periosteum had long since been destroyed by the suppuration … But here is another difficulty: where did the phosphate of lime come from to fill the gap? It could only come from the blood. Now the whole blood in the body only contains about 1.6 grammes of phosphate of lime, and the callus would require at least four times that amount. Where could it come from?(1) And further, what became of the sequestra? They must have disappeared, but where? And where did all the pus go to? It was so profuse that it poured over the cushions of the vehicle that brought him to the Grotto, much to the annoyance of the driver. And, lastly, the muscles during all these years after the fracture took place were atrophied and useless. How did they regain instantly their pristine vigour? No one is able to answer any of these questions, and yet the cure is incontestable.


#13

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.