Posted on 05/17/2007 10:08:04 AM PDT by Gamecock
Jesus used mud and spit to heal a blind man, the bleeding woman touched His garment and was healed, etc. The Lord works in mysterious ways. Saint Antonio de Sant’Anna Galvao pray for us.
My goodness, Gamecock, you’ve finally shocked me with non-Christian acts by Catholic “healers”! Next you’re going to tell me that they bent down and made a paste out of mud to rub into the eyes of a blind man! (/sarcasm)
>> I believe in God, and the proof is right here. <<
Note, of course, that the witness did not say, “I believe in the magical power of writing prayers on pills.” No, the witness is fully aware that the healing came from God.
>> “That was no miracle,” said Roberto Focaccia, an infectious disease expert at the hospital where Daniela was treated. “Statistics show that an average of 50 percent of these patients die and the other 50 percent recover completely. She was lucky to be among the 50 percent who survive. “It worries me,” he added, “that so many people think that these small pieces of paper can replace the treatment available in any decent hospital in Brazil.” <<
Several points to be made to this idiot:
1. The Church is not alleging the case he refers to is necessarily a miracle. Out of 5,000 attributed miracles, the Church officially recognized two of them.
2. The Church plainly urges all people seeking miraculous cures that the ordinary action of God’s work is through man, and that the rejection of modern medicine is of no spiritual benefit. The Catholic Church firmly opposes Christian Science.
3. His assertion (or “accusation”) of the witnesses’ attribution of the “miracle” to the mere matter of the pills is plainly rebutted.
4. Can anyone truly fault someone for being thankful to God for being one of the “lucky ones,” so long as she does NOT encourage others to forego other means of cures?
So, if you "return home" to Rome, you get the whole ball of wax, including the beatification of saints who give out Tic-Tac size rice-paper pills which supposedly heal. And Pope Benedict XVI will be there to bless it all.
Ah, but at least the Catholic Church is too intellectual and sophisticated to believe in all those phony Biblical events like creation in six days or Noah's Ark or the Tower of Babel or Jonah's Fish. Can't you see the profundity of post-Biblical, non-Biblical, and anti-Biblical supernaturalism? [/sarcasm]
How do you know any of this happened? After all, it's in your "bible" and therefore probably never really happened, right?
Amen.
"Man's mind is like a store of idolatry and superstition; so much so that if a man believes his own mind it is certain that he will forsake God and forge some idol in his own brain." -- John Calvin
do you need a hug?
In case you haven’t noticed, he is Christ.
Why? Do you think giving me one would make your picking and choosing which miracles actually happened and which are mere myths any less illogical or hypocritical?
This is very biblical, actually. In Acts 19:11-12 we read, “And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul.
So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.” If God can work miracles of healing through pieces of cloth that had touched the hands of a holy apostle, why should He not work miracles through pieces of paper that had touched the hands of another holy man? Indeed we read also in Acts that people would be cured if Peter’s shadow passed over them.
I don’t get it: what is so unbiblical about miracles? Or is it just “Roman” miracles? By the bye, the word “Roman” if used to mean Catholic is a pejorative term, just like “Romish”, “Romanist”, “papist”, “papistical”, etc. That kind of epithet is best left back in the times of the religious wars. The official name of the Church is “Catholic Church”, not “Roman Catholic Church”. Anglicans say “Roman Catholic”, because they regard themselves as catholic too, and for that reason the term is sometimes used even by Catholics of themselves. In Catholic parlance the term “Roman Church” is sometimes used, but when it is it does NOT refer to the whole Catholic Church but rather to the Church of the city or diocese of Rome. That is why Cardinals are called “cardinals of the Holy Roman Church”, they are in theory officials of the church of the city of Rome, which is why they elect the bishop of that city (the pope). Let’s stop the insulting use of “Romanism”, etc., please. If you mean Catholic say Catholic.
"Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way." -- Psalm 119:104
lol. Someone should heal the top of his head.
That makes more sense than the Catholic position of believing in post-Biblical miracles but insisting that the miracles of the "old testament" are nothing but "mythology."
Not being a chr*stian, the ban on hatred doesn't even apply to me!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.