The Heavens Are Silent

[Socrates]

[quote name='Era Might' date='18 March 2010 - 10:22 AM' timestamp='1268922140' post='2075093']
Both. They are interrelated.

My issue is not really that "there are no miracles today" (people claim miracles today). My point about miracles is just that miracles are claims, not facts. Even non-Christians claim miracles.
[/quote]
"An evil and adulterous generation seeks a sign" ~ Matthew 12:39

[cmotherofpirl]

Fatima

Lourdes

Kibeho

Rwanda

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=50007&repos=4&subrepos=1&searchid=597220

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=3331&repos=4&subrepos=2&searchid=597220

[Era Might]

I'm not seeking a sign. My point was simply that claims to miracles are not uniquely Catholic or Christian. If there is a God, then which claims to miracles are legitimate? Only the Catholic ones? Only the Christian ones?

[cmotherofpirl]

Cannot you say that all miracles show the power and mercy of God?

[Era Might]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='18 March 2010 - 03:26 PM' timestamp='1268940414' post='2075256']
Cannot you say that all miracles show the power and mercy of God?
[/quote]
Well, part of the purpose of miracles as I understand them is to prove something. So, for example, the Resurrection is the "proof" that Christ was who he said he was.

The assumption among Catholics is that miracles (and particularly apparitions) are "proof" of Catholicism's claims. But the Eastern Orthodox claim miracles as well. If miracles are "proof" of legitimacy, then why would God do miracles for the Eastern Orthodox? And if miracles are proof, then would God do miracles among non-Christians when those miracles are going to be seen as "proof" of their own religions?

And then there are other complicating factors. For example, Mary supposedly told St. Bernadette, "I am the Immaculate Conception." Yet Eastern Catholics (at least some of them) will argue that the Immaculate Conception is foreign to the East. It seems very curious to me that all these apparitions just *happen* to be in Western language and Western concepts. What of the East? Does God speak one way to the West, and another way to the East?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Era Might' date='18 March 2010 - 04:34 PM' timestamp='1268940849' post='2075264']
Well, part of the purpose of miracles as I understand them is to prove something. So, for example, the Resurrection is the "proof" that Christ was who he said he was.

The assumption among Catholics is that miracles (and particularly apparitions) are "proof" of Catholicism's claims. But the Eastern Orthodox claim miracles as well. If miracles are "proof" of legitimacy, then why would God do miracles for the Eastern Orthodox? And if miracles are proof, then would God do miracles among non-Christians when those miracles are going to be seen as "proof" of their own religions?

And then there are other complicating factors. For example, Mary supposedly told St. Bernadette, "I am the Immaculate Conception." Yet Eastern Catholics (at least some of them) will argue that the Immaculate Conception is foreign to the East. It seems very curious to me that all these apparitions just *happen* to be in Western language and Western concepts. What of the East? Does God speak one way in the West, and one way in the East?
[/quote]
I see miracles as proof against the assertion that God is on vacation and not paying attention. And if God speaks to people with messages for us,it would do little not to use peoples current framework to get the message across i.e.he wouldn't speak in chinese to an irishman, or western theology to an eastern catholic - there has to be some frame of reference.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Era Might' date='18 March 2010 - 01:34 PM' timestamp='1268940849' post='2075264']
Well, part of the purpose of miracles as I understand them is to prove something. So, for example, the Resurrection is the "proof" that Christ was who he said he was.

The assumption among Catholics is that miracles (and particularly apparitions) are "proof" of Catholicism's claims. But the Eastern Orthodox claim miracles as well. If miracles are "proof" of legitimacy, then why would God do miracles for the Eastern Orthodox? And if miracles are proof, then would God do miracles among non-Christians when those miracles are going to be seen as "proof" of their own religions?

And then there are other complicating factors. For example, Mary supposedly told St. Bernadette, "I am the Immaculate Conception." Yet Eastern Catholics (at least some of them) will argue that the Immaculate Conception is foreign to the East. It seems very curious to me that all these apparitions just *happen* to be in Western language and Western concepts. What of the East? Does God speak one way to the West, and another way to the East?
[/quote]

don't take this as me posting some sort of proof-text without commentary. I have no idea if this helps you or furthers your concern. I just thought this passage may somehow be relevant:

Mark 9:37-38 "John answered him, saying: Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, who followeth not us, and we forbade him. But Jesus said: Do not forbid him. For there is no man that doth a miracle in my name, and can soon speak ill of me."

[AccountDeleted]

Era - the type of community you talk about is rare or non-existant I guess (I am not sure, not having lived everywhere, just lots of places) but maybe that is because there are no apostles any more to lead and guide us. That doesn't mean that there aren't saints or saintly people, including Bishops who could be doing this in out of the way places, but in Boston? No, I don't think so. A lot of your problem might be that you are living in a very industrialized nation where community is not as highly valued as prestige and money and power. If you lived in some tiny Catholic country where the faith was strong, perhaps you might find this, I don't know.

But that doesn't mean that you can't start to become one of those people who is an example to others of what that type of community should be. Perhaps you need to be a leader and not be looking for someone or somewhere that is already established. St Francis hated what he saw in the Church too, and God told him to rebuild it. He got it wrong at first and rebuilt San Damino, but later his efforts turned out to be the rebuilding of the Church itself. If you have a vision of what the Church should be, then work towards that, and pray to the Holy Spirit to guide you along the way. Who knows, the miracles may come about through your efforts at trying to please God? It only takes one person to start (as you pointed out the Catholic Workers).



I think your sensitivity and concern are wonderful. Now you need to channel these in a productive way with God's help.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Era Might' date='18 March 2010 - 01:38 PM' timestamp='1268933929' post='2075191']
This thread is about the problem of institutionalization in society and in the Church.
[/quote]

I don't see a problem, as long as people aren't considered raw material.

[SaintOfVirtue]

(I have not read every post, so this may have nothing to do with the immediate discussion above)

I once heard a Redemptorist priest give a talk, and while I cannot remember everything he said or how he said it I will do my best to recreate it.

[quote]"...How long will it take for the devil to convince you to leave the church? How much will he show you before you leave? Some people he only had to show the removal of the alter rail, others the guitar player in choir and the more modern music. For some it was the seemingly increasing lack of a back bone on the part of the Church as far as defending the faith against modern culture. How long will it be for you? How much will you suffer before you leave? In other countries where safety in the house and on the streets is nigh on non-existent, the devil uses physical persecution to accomplish these ends.[here he cited instances of huge deterioration of various congregations in countries where Catholicism had effectively been outlawed] In America and the other civilized countries he uses different means, which are by far, crueler. In these countries he attacks the mind, and the heart of the person. He presents them ideas, which they struggle to overcome and once he finds an idea that seems to work he will persist. How long will it take, or how much will he show you before you leave? Remember Judas has been with the Church since the beginning, from its very inception the church's hierarchy was flawed. but the real question remains: how many Judas' will it take to make you stop believing the Church and start believing a lie?[/quote]

"We have one advantage: we know who wins, we know the last page of the book." -Fr. John Corapi

I also highly recommend C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity and the Problem with Pain as well as the Screwtape Letters.

[Gregorius]

Recently the Pope was speaking about St. Bonaventure and his response to Joachim of Fiore. I don't think this is exactly the issue at hand, but the topic touches many points covered here.

For your consideration:
[quote]"There is not another higher Gospel, there is not another Church to await…"

by Benedict XVI

Dear brothers and sisters, [...] among various merits, St. Bonaventure had that of interpreting authentically and faithfully the figure of St. Francis of Assisi, whom he venerated and studied with great love.

In a particular way, in the times of St. Bonaventure a current of Friars Minor called "spiritual" held that there was a totally new phase of history inaugurated with St. Francis; the "eternal Gospel" had appeared, of which Revelation speaks, which replaced the New Testament.

This group affirmed that the Church had now exhausted her historical role, and in her place came a charismatic community of free men guided interiorly by the Spirit, namely, the "spiritual Franciscans."

At the base of the ideas of this group were the writings of a Cistercian abbot, Joachim of Fiore, who died in 1202. In his works, he affirmed a Trinitarian rhythm of history. He considered the Old Testament as the age of the Father, followed by the time of the Son, the time of the Church. To be awaited yet was the third age, that of the Holy Spirit.

The whole of history was thus interpreted as a history of progress: from the severity of the Old Testament to the relative liberty of the time of the Son, in the Church, up to the full liberty of the children of God, in the period of the Holy Spirit, which would have been also the period of peace among men, of the reconciliation of peoples and religions.

Joachim of Fiore aroused the hope that the beginning of the new time would come from a new monasticism. It is thus understandable that a group of Franciscans thought it recognized in St. Francis of Assisi the initiator of the new time and in his order the community of the new period –- the community of the time of the Holy Spirit, which left behind it the hierarchical Church, to begin a new Church of the Spirit, no longer connected to the old structures.

There was, hence, the risk of a very serious misunderstanding of the message of St. Francis, of his humble fidelity to the Gospel and to the Church, and such a mistake implied an erroneous vision of Christianity as a whole.

St. Bonaventure, who in 1257 became minister-general of the Franciscans, found himself before serious tension within his own order due, precisely, to those who espoused this current of "spiritual Franciscans," which aligned itself to Joachim of Fiore. Precisely to respond to this group and to give unity again to the order, St. Bonaventure carefully studied the authentic writings of Joachim of Fiore and those attributed to him and, taking into account the need to present correctly the figure and message of his beloved St. Francis, he wished to show a correct view of the theology of history.

St. Bonaventure addressed the problem in fact in his last work, a collection of conferences to monks of the Paris studio, which remained unfinished and which was completed with the transcriptions of the hearers. It was titled "Hexaemeron," that is, an allegorical explanation of the six days of creation.

The Fathers of the Church considered the six or seven days of the account of creation as a prophecy of the history of the world, of humanity. The seven days represented for them seven periods of history, later interpreted also as seven millennia. With Christ we would have entered the last, namely, the sixth period of history, which would then be followed by the great sabbath of God. St. Bonaventure accounts for this historical interpretation of the relation of the days of creation, but in a very free and innovative way.

For him, two phenomena of his time render necessary a new interpretation of the course of history.

The first: the figure of St. Francis, the man totally united to Christ up to communion of the stigmata, almost an "alter Christus," and with St. Francis the new community created by him, different from the monasticism known up to then. This phenomenon called for a new interpretation, as a novelty of God which appeared in that moment.

The second: the position of Joachim of Fiore, who announced a new monasticism and a totally new period of history, going beyond the revelation of the New Testament, called for an answer.

As minister-general of the Order of Franciscans, St. Bonaventure had seen immediately that with the spiritualistic conception, inspired by Joachim of Fiore, the order was not governable, but was going logically toward anarchy.

For him there were two consequences .

The first: the practical need of structures and of insertion in the reality of the hierarchical Church, of the real Church, needed a theological foundation, also because the others, those who followed the spiritualist conception, showed an apparent theological foundation.

The second: although taking into account the necessary realism, it was not necessary to lose the novelty of the figure of St. Francis.

How did St. Bonaventure respond to the practical and theoretical need? Of his answer I can only give here a very schematic and incomplete summary in some points:

St. Bonaventure rejected the idea of the Trinitarian rhythm of history. God is one for the whole of history and he is not divided into three divinities. As a consequence, history is one, even if it is a journey and – according to St. Bonaventure – a journey of progress.

Jesus Christ is the last word of God, in him God has said all, giving and expressing himself. More than himself, God cannot express, cannot give. The Holy Spirit is Spirit of the Father and of the Son. Christ himself says of the Holy Spirit: He "will bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you" (John 14:26), "he will take what is mine and declare it to you" (John 16:15).

Hence, there is not another higher Gospel, there is not another Church to await. Because of this, the Order of St. Francis had also to insert itself in this Church, in her faith, in her hierarchical order.

This does not mean that the Church is immobile, fixed in the past and that novelties cannot be exercised in her. "Opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt," the works of Christ do not go backward, do not fail, but progress, says the saint in the letter "De tribus quaestionibus."

Thus St. Bonaventure formulates explicitly the idea of progress, and this is a novelty in comparison with the Fathers of the Church and a great part of his contemporaries. For St. Bonaventure, Christ is no longer, as he was for the Fathers of the Church, the end, but the center of history; history does not end with Christ, but a new period begins.

Another consequence is the following: prevailing up to that moment was the idea that the Fathers of the Church were at the absolute summit of theology, all the following generations could only be their disciples. Even St. Bonaventure recognizes the Fathers as teachers for ever, but the phenomenon of St. Francis gave him the certainty that the richness of the word of Christ is inexhaustible and that also new lights can appear in the new generations. The uniqueness of Christ also guarantees novelties and renewal in all the periods of history.

Certainly, the Franciscan Order – so he stresses – belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ, to the Apostolic Church, and cannot build itself on a utopian spiritualism. But, at the same time, the novelty of such an order is valid in comparison with classic monasticism, and St. Bonaventure [...] defended this novelty against the attacks of the secular clergy of Paris. The Franciscans do not have a fixed monastery, they can be present everywhere to proclaim the Gospel. Precisely the break with stability, characteristic of monasticism, in favor of a new flexibility, restored to the Church her missionary dynamism.

At this point perhaps it is useful to say that also today there are views according to which the whole history of the Church in the second millennium is a permanent decline; some see the decline already immediately after the New Testament.

In reality, "opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt," the works of Christ do not go backward, but progress. What would the Church be without the new spirituality of the Cistercians, of the Franciscans and Dominicans, of the spirituality of St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross, and so on?

This affirmation is also valid today: "Opera Christi non deficiunt, sed proficiunt," they go forward. St. Bonaventure teaches us the whole of the necessary discernment, even severe, of the sober realism and of openness to new charisms given by Christ, in the Holy Spirit, to his Church.

And while this idea of decline is repeated, there is also the other idea, this "spiritualistic utopianism," which is repeated. We know, in fact, how after the Second Vatican Council, some were convinced that everything should be new, that there should be another Church, that the pre-conciliar Church was finished and that we would have another, totally "other" Church. An anarchic utopianism! And thanks be to God, the wise helmsmen of Peter’s Barque, Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II, on one hand defended the novelty of the council and on the other, at the same time, defended the uniqueness and continuity of the Church, which is always a Church of sinners and always a place of grace.

In this connection, St. Bonaventure, as minister-general of the Franciscans, took a line of government in which it was very clear that the new order could not, as a community, live at the same "eschatological height" of St. Francis, in which he saw the future world anticipated, but – guided, at the same time, by healthy realism and spiritual courage – had to come as close as possible to the maximum realization of the Sermon on the Mount, which for St. Francis was the rule, though taking into account the limits of man, marked by original sin.
Thus we see that for St. Bonaventure, to govern was not simply a task but was above all to think and to pray. At he base of his government we always find prayer and thought; all his decisions resulted from reflection, from thought illumined by prayer. His profound contact with Christ always accompanied his work of minister-general and that is why he composed a series of theological-mystical writings, which express the spirit of his government and manifest the intention of guiding the order interiorly, of governing, that is, not only through commands and structures, but through guiding and enlightening souls, orienting them to Christ.

Of these his writings, which are the soul of his government and show the way to follow either as an individual or a community, I would like to mention only one, his masterwork, the "Itinerarium mentis in Deum," which is a "manual" of mystical contemplation.

This book was conceived in a place of profound spirituality: the hill of La Verna, where St. Francis had received the stigmata. In the introduction, the author illustrates the circumstances that gave origin to his writing: "While I meditated on the possibility of the soul ascending to God, presented to me, among others, was that wondrous event that occurred in that place to Blessed Francis, namely, the vision of the winged seraphim in the form of a crucifix. And meditating on this, immediately I realized that such a vision offered me the contemplative ecstasy of Father Francis himself and at the same time the way that leads to it" ("Journey of the Mind in God," Prologue, 2, in "Opere di San Bonaventura. Opuscoli Teologici," 1, Rome, 1993, p. 499).

The six wings of the seraphim thus became the symbol of six stages that lead man progressively to the knowledge of God through observation of the world and of creatures and through the exploration of the soul itself with its faculties, up to the satisfying union with the Trinity through Christ, in imitation of St. Francis of Assisi.

The last words of St. Bonaventure’s "Itinerarium," which respond to the question of how one can reach this mystical communion with God, would make one descend to the depth of the heart: "If you now yearn to know how that happens (mystical communion with God), ask grace, not doctrine; desire, not the intellect; the groaning of prayer, not the study of the letter; the spouse, not the teacher; God, not man; darkness not clarity; not light but the fire that inflames everything and transport to God with strong unctions and ardent affections… We enter therefore into darkness, we silence worries, the passions and illusions; we pass with Christ Crucified from this world to the Father, so that, after having seen him, we say with Philip: that is enough for me" (Ibid., VII, 6).

Dear friends, let us take up the invitation addressed to us by St. Bonaventure, the Seraphic Doctor, and let us enter the school of the divine Teacher: We listen to his Word of life and truth, which resounds in the depth of our soul. Let us purify our thoughts and actions, so that he can dwell in us, and we can hear his divine voice, which draws us toward true happiness.[/quote]
Zenit published this, and Father Z copies and analyzes in his [url="http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/03/benedict-xvi-on-how-to-govern/"]blog.[/url]

[Era Might]

Yeah, I happened to see that address on St. Bonaventure. I don't know anything about Joachim of Fiore, but it sounds like he was against hierarchy and authority, which I am not. Rather, I am against the institutionalization of hierarchy and authority in the Church.

[quote]
In a particular way, in the times of St. Bonaventure a current of Friars Minor called "spiritual" held that there was a totally new phase of history inaugurated with St. Francis; the "eternal Gospel" had appeared, of which Revelation speaks, which replaced the New Testament.[/quote]
I certainly do not believe in any new Gospel that replaces the New Testament. Just the opposite. I think the New Testament example should be normative among Christians.

[Lilllabettt]

I don't get it. So you're against the institutional character of the Catholic Church. So what? Since when does that mean you can't be Catholic? Back in the day, there was no big apparatus. In the mission lands there still isn't an apparatus. There is no institution helping the poor, just ordinary Christians going out and serving.

You think the Church should follow a different model. Good for you. Dulles thought likewise, I think. Ratzinger wrote about it too. Both those guys are Catholic.

St. Fancis wanted his community to be a bunch of people who come together, stay as long as they wished, no organization, no hierachy, no nothing. It only changed because the order got too big, attracted the attention of higher ups, etc. He lived that way and believed those things and was perfectly Catholic.

I don't get what the problem is.

[sistersintigo]

[quote name='Era Might' date='05 March 2010 - 03:40 AM' timestamp='1267771255' post='2066968']
As I said, I cannot work within the institution. That includes religious life, which has been institutionalized like everything else in the Church. Priests and religious are free labor for the ecclesial institution. The Church builds all kinds of institutions precisely because it has this free labor (e.g., nuns and Jesuits to run schooling institutions). The religious orders have become branches in the worldwide ecclesial institution. Becoming a monk or a nun means becoming a sort of employee for the worldwide ecclesial institution, because joining the religious order is by extension making a commitment to the ecclesial institution. I am not against religious life, but I do not believe in institutionalized religious life. As I said, the best I can do is ignore the Church as an institution, because the institution inevitably wants to control and manage everything, even your vocation.
[/quote]
This is what fascinates me about Saint Bruno and his nine-hundred-years-old Order of Carthusian religious. Bruno was very well known to the ecclesial authorities of his time, and he had bishop ordination offered to him (although we don't even know for sure that he had been ordained a priest). But not only did Bruno turn his back on the pope and the anti-pope and all their disagreements, but his order's charism became one which REFUSED to let anybody make bishops out of its monks. Which cannot be said of most religious orders. The Carthusians refuse to be tools. I think they are remarkably brave people. And they would understand your exclamation that "the heavens are silent."

[Jaime]

[quote name='Era Might' date='18 March 2010 - 01:38 PM' timestamp='1268933929' post='2075191']
As I said before, this thread is not about me. There are any number of things that I can do in my personal life. But that's not what this thread is about. This thread is about the problem of institutionalization in society and in the Church.

I'm not "railing" against anything. I'm discussing the nature of institutions and their affect on society and on the Church.

It is certainly possible to build a counter-culture within an institutionalized society. Possible, though not easy. But nevertheless, if people never point out what's wrong with society (and with the Church), then we just continue to be blind to what's happening around us.

If I wanted to "rail" against the Church, I would just ignore it. The only reason why I discuss these matters is because I actually care about the Church, and am appalled and saddened at what it has become over the centuries.
[/quote]

I do think its about you. (and I'm not being derogatory) I think you have a long distance girlfriend. I think you've been overwhelmed with homework. And I think you've gotten into the routine of having more to do online than in real life. I could be wrong. I don't know you but I'm not wrong in saying there is certainly a vast amount of potential red flags that I could point to that leads me to this conclusion. I think you are lonely. I think you need a stronger support system that you can see, touch and feel. And its easier to focus on the flaws of the Church than to accept what is lacking in our lives sometimes.

Like I said Era, I could be wrong. But I get the feeling you've got more people who support you online than you do IRL. That doesn't work in a lot of cases.