Posted on 02/12/2010 2:03:10 PM PST by Graybeard58
VATICAN CITY -- Pope John Paul II whipped himself with a belt, even on vacation, and slept on the floor as acts of penitence and to bring him closer to Christian perfection, according to a new book by the Polish prelate spearheading his sainthood case.
The book "Why He's a Saint" also includes previously unpublished speeches and documents written by John Paul, including one 1989 signed memo in which he said he would resign if he became incapacitated.
The book also reported for the first time that John Paul forgave his would-be assassin in the ambulance on the way to the hospital moments after he was shot on May 13, 1981, in St. Peter's Square. And it reported that he initially thought his attacker was a member of the Italian terrorist organization the Red Brigades.
The book was written by Monsignor Slawomir Oder, the postulator, or main promoter, for John Paul's canonization cause and was released Tuesday. It was based on the testimony of the 114 witnesses and boxes of documentation Oder gathered on John Paul's life to support the case.
At a news conference Tuesday, Oder defended John Paul's practice of self-mortification, which some faithful use to remind them of the suffering of Jesus on the cross.
"It's an instrument of Christian perfection," Oder said, responding to questions about how such a practice could be condoned considering Catholic teaching holds that the human body is a gift from God.
In the book, Oder wrote that John Paul frequently denied himself food -- especially during the holy season of Lent -- and "frequently spent the night on the bare floor," messing up his bed in the morning so he wouldn't draw attention to his act of penitence.
"But it wasn't limited to this. As some members of his close entourage
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
Those who utilize worn canards like "self-made religion" and "assurance of their own merit" may have forgotten that Jesus himself fasted for 40 days in the desert.
All are called to spiritual discipline, some more than others. Alas, many have no spiritual discipline at all.
You have shown a complete lack of understanding of the purpose of self-mortification. That's perfectly fine, and of course anyone who wishes to misunderstand is welcome to. However, for the record, you are mistaken; it is wrong to demand that EVERYONE see self-mortification the same way YOU do. Such a demand would evidence the sin of pride, thinking that one viewpoint is necessarily right, and another completely wrong, by OPINION ONLY.
And who named John MacArthur pope? He is about as ill-informed on things Catholic as my pet poodle. Seriously, he has a real bias.
And quite apart from that, his translation is tendentious—more a paraphrase than translation, expressing his biases. He’s entitled to them, of course, but citing him as an authority will convince only those who are already convinced MacArthur fans. The rest of us have other resources for understanding and interpreting that verse.
Sorry, bud, but you totally missed the point. We say that extreme pain undergone by soldiers training or by athletes training is good. Did you get that, pain is good if it is ascesis, training for something good.
I did not say that something bad, if done in moderation, is good. I said that ascesis, training, is good and that you, unless your a really weird person, accept the goodness of training for soldiers, football players, marathon runners etc.
Your premise, that sufering is never good is absurd and most people know it’s absurd because they accept: no pain, no gain.
And yes, the pain a soldier undergoes in training and the pain an athlete undergoes is real pain, real suffering.
Think about it.
So soldiers should not undergo painful training? Women should not undergo painful childbirth? Athletes should not undergo painful training?
Do you realize how absurd your mantra is? What a distorter of Scripture you are.
I think the difference in those circumstances is that the pain is not the direct objective, but rather, an undesirable side-effect of the training processes.
Soldiers don’t shoot themselves in the arm, nor do athletes trip and fall, on purpose.
Whipping oneself, impaling, blood-letting, etc., are not side-effects, in the same manner.
Sir,
What gives you the notion that the pain is the direct objective in what John Paul II? The direct objective is EXACTLY the same as that of an athlete or a soldier: the pain endured during training prepares the soldier for the fight.
From the very beginning of Christianity and long before that in Judaism (Daniel and his companions insisted on an ascetic, rigorous diet, which their Babylonian captors mocked but were then astonished when Daniel ended up fit and stronger than their own courtiers), moderation, discipline in eating, sleeping and voluntarily undertaken exercises were employed to focus oneself, prepare oneself for the battle with sin and the devil. The athletic metaphor is used by St. Paul in Scripture (fought the fight, run the race, suffered in 57 different varieties in II Corinthians, which was the Scripture reading in the Catholic Church last Sunday). The entire Christian life as warfare against the Devil is Scriptural, as I’m sure you know.
Well, if we are engaged in warfare against the Devil and temptation, then learning self-discipline is crucial. THAT’S JPII WAS DOING.
The entire history of the Christian faith as well as most other religions as well as sports, Boy Scouts, military training, education, etc. all recognize: no pain no gain (the pain is not the objective but the gain is).
“Undesirable side effect of the training process.”
Do you run? Do you workout in a gymn? Did you ever cram for an exam? Are you a veteran?
THE PAIN IS NOT A SIDE-EFECT. You cannot grow a muscle if you only push it to a pain-free level. You have to increase the resistance to the point that you hurt a little. Not too much or you do damage rather than strengthen. The same for running, the same for any training. The pain is not a side effect but a necessary means to the goal: becoming fit, stronger, more disciplined.
You would never think twice about this idea if you didn’t have it in your head that spiritual practices unfamiliar to you have to be wrong. Just because (some) Protestants lost sight of these basic spiritual practices you think they are weird and wrong. John Wesley understood the necessity for methodical, disciplined “spiritual training”—which is why his followers were called Methodists.
Fasting is the one ascetic spiritual practice that even you probably recognize as good. There is NO DIFFERENCE in category between fasting and the kind of discipline John Paul did. The early Christians fasted. All cultures understand the value of fasting. It’s the same principle: by voluntarily undergoing pain, you gain fitness, focus, strength, both physically and spiritually (the buzz, the sense of focus you get after hard physical exercise: we are body-soul unities).
Just drop your presuppositions. Back away and really just think, with an open mind about this. You accept this principle in a hundred different ways and don’t think twice about it. But when it’s a Catholic doing something you’re not familiar with, based on the VERY SAME principle, you have to scrounge around to try to come up with some sort of refutation.
Could it just be, for once, that something unfamiliar to you might be good.
Read Richard Foster’s book on spiritual disciplines—I forget the title, but it was a big hit among Protestants 30 years ago—time tested, ancient spiritual ascetic practices that Protestants abandoned, he (a Quaker) argued, made perfect sense.
And where in the world do you get “whipping, impaling, bloodletting”? JPII did nothing of that.
Good post, thank you.
He never listened to the grotesque Reformed caricature of Paul because he was too busy listening to Jesus. Are you listening to the grotesque Reformed caricature of Saint Paul instead of Jesus?
I was not referring specifically to this case.
Passion plays, etc. Those are what I had in mind, and whipping is certainly not the only thing that goes on there.
John MacArthur - http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/sg2143.htm
AMEN!
“My dad did something similar to me.”
That’s nothing, I got married!
No, I didn’t miss your point about athletes etc. But you said self-flagellation in moderation is OK. I don’t agree. I’d be crazy to say all kinds non-self-inflicted pain are bad. You made a distinction and then didn’t follow your own distinction. Here’s what I think, FWIW: pain in a good cause is OK; pain for the sake of repentance is wacko, even in moderation.
Others on this thread have already supplied you with specific citations where Paul speaks of practicing penances.
I will readily admit that Saint Paul and I are members of the same Church, the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church of Rome, with Saint Peter and his successors as bishop of Rome at the head.
13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, "Abba, Father." 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs -- heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together. -- Romans 8:13-17
7 If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? 8 But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons. 9 Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? 10 For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness. 11 Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. -- Hebrews 12:7-11
I'm really questioning whether we read the same Bible.
Passion plays are stage productions, though. All of those things are being simulated, they aren't real.
Perhaps you're thinking of the Filipino guys who get themselves crucified with real nails every year, but the Catholic Church does not endorse that kind of thing.
We read the same Bible. I don't interpret "chastening" the same way you do. I HOPE that the Lord chastens me when I have made a mistake. His rod and his staff, they comfort me. I don't need to add a belt and a whip in my own misguided fervor.
Poor pope Paul read this like..."if by the belt you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live." So, in Catholic theology the belt = Spirit? That's more perverse than I thought.
And you have shown a complete misunderstanding of the Gospel. But, that is the error of Catholicism rooted in self-made righteousness...the ultimate sin of pride. Repent Rome, if you can.
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.