Posted on 10/25/2007 9:24:05 AM PDT by NYer
The Other Christ: Padre Pio and 19th Century Italy, by the historian Sergio Luzzatto, draws on a document found in the Vatican's archive.
|
|
|
|
|
The document reveals the testimony of a pharmacist who said that the young Padre Pio bought four grams of carbolic acid in 1919.
"I was an admirer of Padre Pio and I met him for the first time on 31 July 1919," wrote Maria De Vito.
She claimed to have spent a month with the priest in the southern town of San Giovanni Rotondo, seeing him often.
"Padre Pio called me to him in complete secrecy and telling me not to tell his fellow brothers, he gave me personally an empty bottle, and asked if I would act as a chauffeur to transport it back from Foggia to San Giovanni Rotondo with four grams of pure carbolic acid.
"He explained that the acid was for disinfecting syringes for injections. He also asked for other things, such as Valda pastilles."
The testimony was originally presented to the Vatican by the Archbishop of Manfredonia, Pasquale Gagliardi, as proof that Padre Pio caused his own stigmata with acid.
It was examined by the Holy See during the beatification process of Padre Pio and apparently dismissed.
Padre Pio, whose real name was Francesco Forgione, died in 1968. He was made a saint in 2002. A recent survey in Italy showed that more people prayed to him than to Jesus or the Virgin Mary. He exhibited stigmata throughout his life, starting in 1911.
The new allegations were greeted with an instant dismissal from his supporters. The Catholic Anti-Defamation League said Mr Luzzatto was a liar and was "spreading anti-Catholic libels".
Pietro Siffi, the president of the League, said: "We would like to remind Mr Luzzatto that according to Catholic doctrine, canonisation carries with it papal infallibility.
"We would like to suggest to Mr Luzzatto that he dedicates his energies to studying religion properly."
What case is that?
See post #247.
See post 10.
The problem is language. Too often people talk past each other or misunderstand what is being said.
To the Protestant, prayer = act of worship.
To the Catholic/Council of Chalcedon-observant Orthodox, prayer is not limited to acts of worship, but also beeseching angels and saints to pray for us.
The same word is being used but have different theologies behind them.
Then kindly read the rest of the thread and don't continue to rehash the same issues that have already been asked and answered.
So do you pray to saints?
If you'd bother to read the rest of the thread, you'd see that I have already been asked this question and have already answered it.
It's bad enough that we have to put up with being badgered like we're defendants on a witness stand and you guys are prosecuting attorneys, without having to answer the same stupid questions more than once on the same thread.
The catechism is not an infallible document.
It expresses infallible teachings, but there are certainly errors in it.
It's been through a couple of editions, you know. They don't make new editions of something that's already perfect.
That much you know for certain, and agree upon.
And that you have a sister who loved your mother as well as did you.
That's quite a few blessings.
In the place of 1 Timothy 2:5 ("For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus") you wrote...
"therefore, it is because Jesus Christ is the one mediator before God that we can be subordinate mediators."
LOL. Where does that verse speak about us being "subordinate mediators???"
And you get James 5:16 ("Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much") completely wrong, too. You wrote...
the prayers of the righteous (the saints) have powerful effects. This is why we ask for their prayers. How much more powerful are the saints' prayers in heaven, in whom righteousness has been perfected.
We are to pray for one another while we live, to strengthen and console each other. We are to confess our sins to each other because all men sin. But men cannot absolve us of our sins. Only Christ on the cross pays for our sins.
And nowhere does Scripture say we are to pray to dead people which is idolatry, not so pure and simple.
If your church gets these simple verses so wrong, no wonder RC doctrine is so confused.
Poor baby.
When the RCC comes up with some coherent answers, perhaps the questions will stop.
Why do you fall down to the stock of a tree?
Why do you label Mary a "co-redeemer" and the "dispenser of all grace" (according to a recent Catholic thread.)
Why do you presume there are intercessors between God and men other than Christ Jesus alone, in contradiction to Scripture?
While we're at it, why do you blasphemously regard priests as "another Christ?"
We don't need websites to satisfy our "genuine non-Catholic curiosity." We are challenging your errors because Christ instructs all men to preach the Gospel in truth and light, and to "reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine."
"They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand. And none considereth in his heart, neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say, I have burned part of it in the fire; yea, also I have baked bread upon the coals thereof; I have roasted flesh, and eaten it: and shall I make the residue thereof an abomination? shall I fall down to the stock of a tree? He feedeth on ashes: a deceived heart hath turned him aside, that he cannot deliver his soul, nor say, Is there not a lie in my right hand?" -- Isaiah 44:18-20"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" -- Isaiah 5:20
Perhaps it would be instructive if Catholics would go on Protestant threads and start criticizing Protestant beliefs. We could ask why they don’t believe the words of Our Lord in regards to the Eucharist, accuse them of heresy, beat them over the head with the “One True Church,” etc.
The fact is we do not do this, for the most part. I leave Protestant threads alone. I understand that people are sincere in their beliefs, even if I disagree with them. As a Catholic convert, I accepted the teachings of the Church. Others are free to do as they wish.
I am so seldom here on FR nowadays, and it is distressing to see the attacks which drove me from the political forum have now spread into the religion threads. It is unnecessary and counter-productive.
So why do Roman Catholics pray to saints?
Is God so busy that he can’t hear prayers on His own?
Sorry, but I can’t see myself praying to Saint Marlowe, or Saint Eckleburg for that matter. Nor would I expect them to pray to me.
I'm glad we agree on that.
Thst’s true, but prayer language often retains those older, more traditional usages: “...who art in heaven,” etc.
Did anyone ever see his “stigmata?
Thanks for the ping.
Religion never saved anyone, I would suggest this man seek Christ.
In a LOT of respects,
I routinely—at least often—FEEL ASSAULTED by a LOT of the titles of threads posted by RC folks.
The titles themselves are like sharp sticks trying to goad a provocative response.
Please avoid assuming that RC folks are so lily white in such matters. It’s not been my experience that that is so.
Certainly these are serious spiritual issues with strong feelings on all sides. Strong emotions often do not facilitate smooth mutually respectful dialogue.
However, given the fiercely and brazenly provocative titles as well as content of many, many RC threads, I would anticipate that many Protties will continue to feel compelled to respond forcefully as a matter of faith and doctrine and resulting responsibility before our Lord Jesus.
RC’s are probably doing something similar when they post such seemingly outrageously provocative threads.
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.