predication.net

To encourage believers to have tremendous respect for the heavenly mother, the Virgin Mary, through the prayer of the Holy Rosary.
Are we happy? At least today and now, do we feel some joy? I think so because today is the feast of the Virgin Mary, our mother. And I also believe that it is embedded in every person that he likes his mother. And he wants her more, the kinder, more admirable, and more beautiful she is. And I ask, where is it kinder, friendlier, and more beautiful than in the prayer of the Holy Rosary? What can we realize in praying the rosary? “An angel came to her and said: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” (Lk 1,28)

We read the gospel that we just heard today – on the feast of the Rosary Virgin Mary, during the annunciation and Christmas. We ask why. This passage from today’s Gospel describes her whole life – a humble and devoted servant of the Lord and, at the same time, our Mother. Therefore, it is the most important, the most beautiful, and the most joyful event ever in Maria’s life. During this annunciation in Nazareth, the Virgin Mary heard the fantastic greeting: “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!” Was it the announcement of a small transformation? Or was it a confirmation of an ancient fact? The Church tells us here that the angel does not express some new situation with his greeting; when he says “full of grace,” he sounds like something already there before, already here as a gift of God. Mary has been in God’s love for a long time. This greeting is only meant to highlight and confirm this fact. With this greeting, Mary should know her status – that she is ultimately God’s. The angel’s hello is like a look back at Mary’s life and attitude up until now, and thus also the long-ago entrusted mission and what it consists of. An angel announces the birth of a son. Well, she already had this mission; she already had it before the proclamation; after all, her whole life up until now had been directed towards him! However, her mission was hidden in God’s heart before that. But look here for the human factor of the Virgin Mary because she was human. When he hears God’s call interpreted by an angel, he gets a little worried as he wonders what such a greeting means. Here, it gets a new name and designation. He suddenly finds himself in the light. She is so humble that she is almost afraid of this light and distinction. He does not consider it wrong or want to reject it. However, she feels tiny and unworthy because she is humble. Although she accepts everything that God offers her, it still worries her. Until now, Maria imagined her mission would be inconspicuous, as if on the sidelines. She thought that she could fulfill God’s intentions in secret, unseen, and unknown by anyone. But this concern is not at odds with her essential willingness. On the contrary, Mary pronounces her “fiat” and agrees, indeed her “become,” her agreement with God’s will is so deep, firm, and devoted that everything – every worry, not only now but throughout her life, dissolves in it. Mary gave herself and still gave herself entirely to God. She did not separate her life from her mission. She understood her life in God as a mission. And here is the true meaning of praying the holy rosary – to connect with Mary and appreciate your whole life in God.

To give your life to God as the Virgin Mary teaches us. And this is exactly how she created great value from her life – before people and God. The Virgin Mary experiences restlessness and sees that giving oneself entirely to God means not only happiness, things that are certain and safe, regular and sound, but also includes things that are surprising and dangerous, often demanding and challenging, and perhaps she will not be spared even the most difficult things. But the Virgin Mary is deeply rooted in God with her whole heart. When he sees and suspects all this, he does not refuse, resist, or fall into confusion. She feels that she has encountered something she did not foresee. She is humanly surprised and trembles. However, she is willing to accept everything, even this concern. She is willing to do anything – even if it escalates to the cross. She agrees with God’s path, so she always fulfills God’s will!

Let’s ask ourselves now: which way am I going? God, by which the Virgin Mary walked? Once and for all? Or do I keep changing the roads, always looking for more comfortable ones lined with flowers? Have I found my way yet? Have I already uttered my “become”? Am I hesitating? Am I calculating? We often ask ourselves what all this says to us personally. Perhaps for a long time, we do not know precisely what we live for, what God expects from us, and our mission. We are waiting for a sign, for God’s greeting, for knowing God’s will. But we must realize, brothers and sisters, that the angel who announces God’s will to us comes through a priest, a parent, a school teacher, a friend, a husband… God sends us daily our “announcements”; let’s think if we accept them with as much willingness as the Virgin Mary! Do we care about them at all? However, our mission does not begin with priestly ordination, sacramental marriage, or religious vows. This is just his sealing. It starts much earlier –it is already hidden in God’s heart. In one moment, the Lord will instill it in us, let us know it – in an experience or sadness, in some situation, after some conversation, while reading a book, or in the middle of prayer. He will let us know His plans for us. Therefore, every day, following the example of the Virgin Mary, we should open up and deepen our willingness to accept God’s will once we know it. Can we say to God at least once a day: “Be it done according to your will,” just like the Virgin Mary, who was always ready to say to God with great humility her lifelong Fiat – “Behold, servant of the Lord, may it be done to me according to your word? ” With this willingness, which we achieve through prayer, especially the prayer of the Holy Rosary, we unite more deeply with our mother – this is how we walk the path with her, we fulfill our mission in life.

Today is the Feast of the Holy Rosary. One of the most beautiful and contemplative prayers that we all have the opportunity to pray and which is given to us by our Mother, the Virgin Mary herself, and is highly recommended by the Church, is the prayer of the Holy Rosary. It is a supplicating prayer to our Mother Mary, who helped us, helps us, and will always help us if we ask her through this prayer. He will certainly hear us, and at the same time, he will ask for countless graces. For many of us, the monotonous repetition of the Lord’s Prayer, Hail Mary’s, is “against the grain.”… But it does not falter; let’s not lose heart; trust in our heavenly Mother. Let’s try to accept this rosary prayer as an offer to hold the hand of our Mother Mary through the rosary! Holding her hand, let us meditate in the spirit of the mysteries of the joyful, painful, solemn rosary and the rosary of light…

The fact that our Mother in Heaven constantly intercedes and prays for us with her son begs for grace for us, and brings us to her son is also evidenced by this story of a young virgin, Suzana, and how she became a happy Catholic. She was raised in an atheist wealthy family in such a way that she felt an excellent resistance, even hatred, towards Christianity. This hatred prompted her to look closely at Catholicism and discover its faults. But while studying the Catholic faith, she sometimes admired the faith’s truths and began to search for God. And the Lord Jesus said that he who seeks will find. With the help of the Virgin Mary, she found faith as follows: Her younger cousin, who was studying in a priestly seminary, gave her a book called Our Lady of Fatima. While reading it, she felt that the heavenly mother, who appeared to the three children, was becoming more and more light and robust for her daily. Even her unbelieving parents, enemies of the Catholic faith, noticed it. The local priest who was to baptize her was afraid that her parents would disinherit her. She replied: “I am not afraid of anything. I don’t care about wealth. The Lord Jesus, to whom my heavenly mother brought me, is enough for me.” Her heroic courage moved the priest and baptized her with great joy. Thus, Suzana achieved true happiness and joy through the heavenly mother Mary in the Catholic faith.

At this moment, dear brothers and sisters, do you feel that our heavenly mother also cares about our happiness when she strengthens us in faith with her example and help? Therefore, dear brothers and sisters, do not be afraid, and let us trust the Virgin Mary in every situation. Whether in joys or sorrows – he will never leave us; he will never leave us alone. After all, what child wouldn’t trust their mother? Let’s fall in love with this prayer of the Holy Rosary and so with our heavenly mother. She will surely lead us to her son, Jesus. Per Mariam and Jesus – through Mary to Jesus.

Did someone look down on you? It hurts. A friend suffers when a friend despises him. A parent also suffers when a child hates him. Young people suffer, and older people suffer because of contempt. The Lord Jesus also sustained similarly. In Korozaine, Bethesda performed several miracles and Capernaum, but they did not accept him as their Lord and God. Addressing them, but also for our instruction, he said: “He who listens to you listens to me, and he who despises you despises me.” But whoever despises me despises him who sent me” (Luke 10:16).

Every contempt also offends. He can hurt very deeply. We know the Lord Jesus came out of love to bring the world back to the Father. He showed his love more than once in the mentioned cities with his miracles. Yet, he sighed sadly: “Woe to you, Korozain! Woe to you, Bethesda! For if miracles had happened in Tire and Sidon that happened to you, long ago they would have been in penitent clothes sitting in ashes and repenting” (Luke 10:13).

Why does it hurt? Because love is rejected. Contempt calls forth a just punishment. Whoever denies the Lord Jesus rejects the God who sent him because, according to the old diplomatic law, the ambassador is like the one who sends him. We know that it happens occasionally that whoever insults a diplomat who represents his nation somewhere insults his entire country. So it is with God. Whoever insults the Lord Jesus does not accept his love, despises it, insults and despises the same God in all three Divine Persons.

In your imprudence rashness, under the pressure of crosses and difficulties, you already wished for a miracle to confirm the truth of faith and God’s existence. We know that even if it did happen, it might not work. No benefit will disprove human objections and bring about conversion. We see it in the performance of the Lord Jesus. What did he do? His miracles, healing, resurrections, and feeding in the desert did not convert most Jews. They persisted in their bias towards the Lord Jesus. Faith does not have to be based on miracles, but we are to believe the words of Jesus. The same was true then and today. People indeed saw the Lord Jesus face to face and could touch him. Today, we have the teaching of the Church that Christ is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, and although he is veiled, we believe in his presence in the sacraments. He says that wherever two or three are gathered together in his name, he is also present among them. Let’s accept the Lord Jesus’s words, listen to them, and not despise his love. Whoever despises the teachings of the Church hates Christ himself because Christ is the same in the Church.

Indeed, children who are ashamed of their father or mother and have no place for them in the house must realize that they are calling down punishment on themselves. The heart of both father and mother can break from the pain. The nature of Christ was pierced on the cross. But let’s ensure that the Golgotha drama and do ​​is not repeated through our actions.

John and James did not yet understand the love of Jesus when they wanted “fire from heaven to destroy” the Samaritan village” (cf. Lk 9:56). The approach to our vocations can be different from us and the environment. For a better understanding, we will analyze several expressions that they will reveal to us the deeper meaning of God’s word. One of these expressions that the evangelists Matthew and Luke have in common is the expression ” I will follow you “.

How do you think today’s people of this world would behave if the Lord Jesus came among us and said: “Follow me?” Let’s each answer this question. How would I, what would I do? What would I say to him? K what did God call us to? First of all, he called us to life. I am here and I didn’t have to be. We weren’t and yet we are here. God called us into existence out of nothing. God called us because he wanted us to be here, because he is with us Jesus invites people to follow him willingly and freely where he is, but let’s do it fully . In marriage, in single life, in consecrated life, religious life. The Lord Jesus calls the whole person to follow. That means not only his whole body, but also his mind and heart. He doesn’t want a person who will follow him, but he has some but… I will follow you, but let me do this and that. I will follow you, but I still have to arrange something. Do not be afraid to answer God’s call, even if the cross awaits us. But God will give us the necessary strength to persevere. Therefore, let’s choose the right path. Let us leave the path of darkness and enter the path of light. It is up to each one of us.

A few thoughts about the priest: Many people, including believers, do not understand and do not realize that the vocation to be a priest is a gift from God, that man did not give it to himself, but God gives it. God must call and man – man – must cooperate with this call. It is not possible for someone to become a priest by buying ordination, by forcing someone to accept priestly ordination. The Church punishes and does not allow such and similar attempts. In the same way, the one who enters the seminary does not have to be a priest yet. There, with the help of designated priests, he will find out if he has a vocation, if he cooperates sufficiently with the gift, and if he is ready to receive priestly ordination. For example, someone has to interrupt his stay in the seminary so that after a time when his vocation has matured and he has clarified things, he can return and receive priestly ordination. And they fire another show when they find out that he does not have the signs of a vocation and does not cooperate with the means necessary on the way to the priesthood. Half of those who entered the seminary leave some seminars during their studies and formation.

 Or conversely, can anyone confirm that God does not exist? And if neither one or the other could be done, what about it? Today, we will talk about the introduction to the arguments for and against God’s existence and will try to answer whether and what such debates are significant.

We live in a time when not only the online world is full of various debates and arguments for and against God’s existence.

This topic has fascinated me for a long time, and it is most interesting how people have thought about it in the past and present. This is also indicated by the fact that I only recently heard the atheist Richard Dawkins say that the question of God’s existence is perhaps the most important.

When you look up the frequency of the English phrase “arguments for God,” we find that this phrase began to rise dramatically after 2001, after the attack on the New York Twin Towers.

It reached its peak of use in 2010, related to the onset and zenith of the so-called New atheism (dose 177). Although its use has declined, it has increased slightly in recent years. Anyway, it is a topic not only of cultural and religious interest but also of academic interest.

Many faculties worldwide have courses devoted to the history and philosophy of religion, which are directly related to this. For example, you can enroll in studies on the religious philosophy of David Hume, on God, the cell, and the universe, or on proving God’s existence. 

“If only it were that easy.”

So today’s topic is arguing for and against God’s existence—first, a little personal. When I began to doubt God’s presence sometime in my younger, prettier but less educated age, I decided to ask. I didn’t look as sophisticated as Socrates with my questions, but rather like the Little Prince visiting different planets.

I thought he was going to break his stick over me, if not his guitar, but his answer was probably more surprising to me than my question was to him. He answered, “I wish it were that easy.” After that, he talked a little more and gave me some more specific reasons, but his intellectual modesty was quite apparent to me, and I appreciated that.

What is the goal?

First, I think it is perfect to ask at the beginning what the goal of all arguments for God’s existence should be. Let’s start with the obvious thing – ideas don’t have plans, but people do. And different people may have other projects.

But mostly today, supporters or users of these arguments do not see it as having a particular superpower, which is to convince someone definitively. And that, for these two reasons.

First, these arguments have little logical force in themselves. This is because the strength of their conclusion depends on the truth of the statements on which they are based. This means that they can be questioned, and so often, because of reasonable objections, these statements and the conclusion of the argument will not be sure.

Instead, we will always have fun here and think about probabilities. But that’s okay because our whole life is about choosing between options that are likely to be true. And that’s why these arguments are not detached from ordinary life, but rather our everyday life from these arguments.

Second, these arguments aren’t about instantly converting others to the opposite view because our psychology, philosophy, and life need to be revised. Even if the opinions pointed toward a particular, very probable conclusion, it would be another thing to be convinced by it logically and psychologically and to change our thinking and behavior.

As a recent example, we can take the many arguments about COVID-19 and vaccination. Although clinical studies show precise results, many not only did not accept them but thought and behaved as if these results were exactly the opposite. In other words, we can always find some excuse for not accepting certain conclusions – and it is often that it makes life more comfortable for us or that we will belong to a particular group whose identity we want to adopt.

That is, we all have our preferences and prejudices. And not only our conspiring fellow citizens but also us, and we have to admit it. As Richard Feynman said, it is essential not to be fooled; the easiest person to fool is ourselves.

Another and sometimes overlapping example is precisely conspiracy theories – no matter what good argument we come up with against them, experienced conspirators have built their own, so to speak, immunization strategies, thanks to which they can never be refuted. Not because they are correct but because they do not play fair and move their logical pieces differently than the rules allow.

But it’s not just about conspirators. We do not operate in such a way that we automatically accept the opposite conclusion if some argument points to it. Or perhaps more precisely, it works for less essential things that can be quickly searched on Google.

However, the more critical and deeply embedded our beliefs are in our worldviews, the longer, at least typically, such a conversion will take. And with worldviews, it certainly applies to both sides. So, you cannot expect any instant transformation from the arguments. And if so, what significance can these discussions have?

Benefit of discussion

So, must the goal in such vital debates as the existence of God be a complete worldview conversion? To ask such a question is to answer it. We all know it doesn’t work that way. But that doesn’t mean that discussing essential things in the universe, including God’s existence, doesn’t have its meaning. Their contribution can take many forms.

For the first time, we can learn something new. It can be new knowledge I learned during the debate or a new perspective I have never had before. Or they can be virtues that we can cultivate in this way – we can learn to listen, formulate our arguments, make reactions, not be unnecessarily nervous or angry, represent the arguments of the other side truthfully if not even more strongly, and thus be an example to all listening.

Moreover, a good argument could be made that such knowledge and moral contribution is often much better than convincing someone or winning a debate.

In this sense, even unsuccessful argumentation, which would not lead to any worldview conversion, has a great potential to be successful in these other aspects. If we summarize it in slightly different words – even an overall flawed argument can have a few good observations hidden in it, and those alone can be worth it.

It also improves our argumentative and personal qualities, including knowledge and epistemic humility. Now, let’s start with one fundamental question – whether the question of God’s existence can be solved with the help of science.

Is it a scientific or a philosophical question?

Can science investigate God? This, of course, depends on whether the scientific methods could test God’s existence. And that relies mainly on whether the so-called methodological naturalism – that is, the fact that science should deal only with natural causes – is how science should and can work.

That deserves a separate dose. But opinions on this are also divided – whether among scientists or philosophers, as well as among believers and non-believers. This is not a meaningless question; on the contrary, it is essential, but there are specific problems with it.

I want to take advantage of this question because it’s crucial. However, it does not have only one solution. Some either deny that science can arbitrarily test God and his activities. First, God is not part of this world in the sense that all other physical objects are part of it.

It is not only a physical object but a mind, which is supposed to be (among other things) omniscient and all-loving. And so, even if we could want to test her, it might be against her will and plans. And it could be as laughable from a broader perspective as if ants wanted to start scientifically testing the existence of some superintelligence in the universe.

Others would argue just the opposite – that we see from the nature of our universe that the universe had its Creator. Some believers claim that God’s activity can be seen indirectly in specific biological structures, in the setting of physical constants and the like.

Others, on the other hand, may perceive such empirical observations oppositely – they say that God’s absence can also be seen in tests of the effectiveness of prayer or the well-known objection of why God does not let amputated limbs grow back.

And yet it is true that many can come up with certain domains where God can be tested, so to speak (setting physical constants) but not in others (effectiveness of prayers for healing). But everyone has answers to these objections and counter-objections, and then there is the question of whether such a selective position is consistent.

One of the popular positions, probably since the time of Newton, is that God works through the natural order. This view has existed since at least the Middle Ages and later reformulated from the time of Descartes and Newton that God works through natural laws.

However, it differs in exactly what way, but we will not go into this adventure hole now. But if God is the first cause and works through laws that he will either not break or only very, very exceptionally, how exactly do we test such a view?

I’m not saying there aren’t different, even creative, answers to this; I’m just pointing out that only some positions can be easily tested, even if we had high-quality test tubes ready.

However, many see this question as a philosophical one. Maybe it would be easier for us if we could test God’s existence in our laboratory, but some, or rather, many things seem impossible and perhaps never will be. And that is why many philosophers are divided on many issues.

One, albeit simplistic, view of how science developed is that many of today’s scientific disciplines were first part of philosophy. However, when sufficient progress was made in these branches, the given field separated from this philosophy and thus created a separate discipline – such as geology, biology, physics, and the like.

If so, which discipline has made sufficient progress to give a quantitative or at least qualified answer to whether God exists? However, according to many experts, nothing like that happened, so this question is still part of philosophy. This question is philosophical because there is yet to be a consensus that a specific relevant authority can resolve this dispute.

Imagine we disagree on the result of a particular football match. I claim that it was some result X and you that result Y. We are certainly not both right, but maybe we are both wrong. What to do then?

Now, it’s easy – we check the result with a particular relevant source, such as a short Google search. If we disagree on the speed of light, we’ll also check it similarly – but here’s the point: it’s not the all-knowing Google itself, but the scientific authority and consensus that we can easily find and read on Google.

But what if there is no way to verify something, or when no authority could authoritatively and qualifiedly decide this for us? What if there is no consensus that it can be verified, or when there are arguments whose conclusions come to different or even opposite conclusions?

Such a situation is a reasonable assumption that in such a situation, we will still be talking about philosophy and philosophical reasoning. Although it may seem very improbable to some, we may someday come to a position where the majority of philosophers and scientists will agree that the question of God’s existence is, for example, a question of physics or – since we are probably talking about the distant future – let’s say some scientific discipline that does not yet exist at all.

Arguments that God’s existence has and can be tested by scientific fact exist and are much more sophisticated than it might seem from Dawkins’s above statement. But this is still a statement with its problems and is only generally accepted by some scientists and philosophers.

Today, we discussed that we can be optimistic that all these arguments, even if they are all bad, can be good for something. But I don’t want to say they are good or bad before we look at them more. And all these more concrete arguments for and against God’s existence and his attributes await us in future installments.