10/04 -- Original Sin: Part I of III
Published by Stephen Michael Leininger in Stephen Michael Leininger · 4 October 2020
Tags: Original, Sin, Tree, of, Good, and, Evil, eyes, opened
Tags: Original, Sin, Tree, of, Good, and, Evil, eyes, opened
Original Sin: Part I of III
Deeper Meaning of the Tree of Good & Evil; Eyes Opening
While Cardinal Ratzinger was Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he gave an interview to Italian journalist, Vittorio Messori. During this interview, he said, “The inability to understand original sin and make it comprehensible is really one of the most serious problems of current theology and pastoring [emphasis SML].”[1] Never has this statement rang more true than it does in today’s world. The Knowledge of Good & Evil is leading us to confuse to: 1) confuse chemical love with spiritual love; 2) to confuse chemical compassion with spiritual compassion; 3) to confuse what is beautiful with what is ugly, and; 4) to confuse apparent good with what is actually good. The Beast of Revelation 12 and 13 has used that confusion well. This two–part blog series is an attempt to help remedy this situation. As Scripture tells us, “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (Jn 16:13).
Let me start by saying that I used to believe that this account in Scripture was symbolic. That it represented some sort of test symbolized by the fruit of the Tree. I have since changed my mind. This change came about because of a deeper understanding of what God means when we are told that, after eating of the forbidden fruit, their eyes were opened. While concupiscence effects both body and soul, the eyes of Adam and Eve being opened refers to a physical, biological, sense-based consequence. It is fitting, therefore, that the test be one that involves the senses as well as the soul. Hence, the apple. This will become clear as we progress through this article.But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate. Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked (Genesis 3:4-7).
In its strict and specific acceptation, a desire [all emphasis SML] of the lower appetite contrary to reason. To understand how the sensuous and the rational appetite can be opposed, it should be borne in mind that their natural objects are altogether different. The object of the former is the gratification of the senses; the object of the latter is the good of the entire human nature and consists in the subordination of reason to God, its supreme good and ultimate end. But the lower appetite is of itself unrestrained, so as to pursue sensuous gratifications independently of the understanding and without regard to the good of the higher faculties.[7]
Role of Salt of DNA in Original Sin
Before we can understand original sin, we must first understand original justice. John Paul II dealt with this subject extensively in the Theology of the Body. I, however, will be looking at original sin and its consequences in the context of The Science & Theology of Salt in Scripture. Pope Pius XII wrote, “The worship rendered by the Church to God must be, in its entirety, interior as well as exterior. It is exterior because the nature of man as a composite of body and soul requires it to be so. ... Every impulse of the human heart, besides, expresses itself naturally through the senses; and the worship of God, being the concern not merely of individuals but of the whole community of mankind, must therefore be social as well.”[8]
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, “Now we have it on the authority of Scripture that ‘God made man right’ (Eccles. 7:30), which rightness, as Augustine says (De Civ. Dei, xiv, 11), consists in the perfect subjection of the body [i.e. salt/dust of DNA] to the soul."[9] Aquinas goes on to show the role that supernatural grace played in our state of original justice. He writes, “Subjection of the body to the soul and of the lower powers to reason, was not from nature; otherwise it would have remained after sin … Hence it is clear that also the primitive subjection by virtue of which reason was subject to God, was not a merely natural gift, but a supernatural endowment of grace.”[10] The body is meant by God’s design to be fully and harmoniously subject to the soul. As an example, we cite St. Catherine of Siena. She tells us that at our resurrection on Judgment Day, our bodies will be “imprinted” with the fruits of the sufferings and labors endured by the body in partnership with the inner heart in the practice of virtue. This imprinted ornamentation, so to speak, will not occur through the power of the body, but through the power of the soul, as it was prior to the fall.[11] This makes sense in light of the philosophical understanding that the soul is the substantial form of the body.[12] To help us understand the soul, body, and form concept, think of a hand and glove. The hand represents the spiritual soul and the leather glove represents the body. Without the hand inside of it, the glove has no form. The matter of the body remains, but it is without form. The sin was of disobedience to God’s command. Consequently, the body became disobedient to the desires of the inner heart.
When Adam and Eve sinned, they lost supernatural grace. Therefore, they forfeit the perfect subjection of the body to the soul. Consequently, human DNA started to function in the same way that it does in any other animal — sensual appetites and all. The bodies of sensual animals function under the same guiding principle that is now at work in our fallen bodies, i.e. what pleases the senses is judged as being good and what displeases the senses is bad. The salt of DNA of fallen man functions in such a way as to reward and encourage behavior/experiences that feel good, and to punish behavior/experiences that feel bad. Were it not for this fact of nature, all animals would die out. This is a perfect design — for animals, but not for man who is a composite of body and rational soul. The sensual appetites of animals and the actions that proceed from those appetites are morally neutral. They are good for animals with sensual souls and, in some cases, also good for man. A lion that kills his offspring is not ‘bad,’ he is just following the biological impulses of his animal nature. Contrary to what modern society tries to foist upon us, man is not simply an animal.
In response to stimuli received through the five senses of the body, the salt of DNA produces hormones (hormones are only one of very many types of proteins produced by DNA). For example, we know that Adam and Eve experienced shame because of the self–realization (brought on by the unmitigated expression of hormones) that they were naked[13] (arguably, lust and stress were probably at play at the same time). Likely, they were also afraid.[14] Most, if not all, of the physical consequences of concupiscence are either directly or indirectly attributable to the production of hormones. As opposed to the spirit, the body seeks a type of happiness that translates into that which is pleasing to the senses; when satisfied, our DNA produces sensual rewards so powerful they can be accurately described as addictive. The body tries to bring the soul over to its way of thinking, so to speak, by offering hormonal rewards that can be very persuasive.
Let us take a closer look at the role of hormones in concupiscence. Can we show a direct link between original sin and hormones? I believe we can. Unlike most other proteins, the biological sciences tell us that hormones are carried to their target cells via the bloodstream. Informed by God, Hildegard tells us that after Adam’s sin, man’s blood carried within itself: 1) sweet, but deadly, poison, i.e., hormones;[15] 2) shameful and turbulent acts, thus increasing the body’s appetite for those very crimes carried in the blood, i.e., slavery to sin;[16] and, 3) impure filth which changed Adam’s blood into a liquid of pollution.[17]
All hormones are produced and secreted in response to sensual stimuli resulting from their eyes being opened. Both shame (the first sign of their eyes being opened) and stress are associated with, among others, the production of the hormone cortisol.[18],[19] Lust of the flesh and, what I refer to as biological (so-called) love, are completely different from spiritual love (a distinction greatly misunderstood in today’s godless culture). Both are associated with multiple hormones, e.g. dopamine,[20] testosterone,[21] oxytocin,[22] and vasopressin.[23] Fear is associated with the “fight or flight” hormone, adrenalin. Other physical consequences of concupiscence are pain in childbirth, hunger,[24] greed, avarice, etc.
Relative to the functioning of the fallen body, the partial list of hormones above provide us with a rudimentary understanding of the meaning of the good and evil that has been brought upon us by the eating of the fruit of the Tree in the center of the Garden. As an example of this newly acquired knowledge, as it relates to fallen man, we can cite the hormones discussed above, some of which can be a strong incentive to bring about physical/biological love. Biological “love” can, over time, lead to the development of true spiritual love followed by marriage. This is good. It gives the sensual being the drive to enter into the sacramental nuptial union, which in turn leads to the fulfillment of God’s very first positive command: be fruitful and multiply. However, it can also lead to evil. When biological love, and its associated drives, decline (all hormonal drives over time require new levels of excitement to maintain the same level of physical/chemical “high”). This can lead to the false belief that one has fallen out of love when, in actuality, it was only biological/chemical love all along. It was not true spiritual love. This love–lust dichotomy can then lead to a multitude of sinful responses.
All hormones are good — for sensual animal creatures. Unfortunately, for rational man they can also lead us to gain concupiscent knowledge of evil. The same hormones that provided strong motivation to initiate the early stages of a relationship that could then transition into a relationship of true spiritual love, can also induce us to lust after the flesh. In turn, lustful temptation can strengthen perverse appetites for, and addictions to, deviant sexual behavior. Another example of this good and evil knowledge is the hunger hormone, ghrelin. It produces feelings of hunger that incentivize us to eat. This, of course, is good if we do not wish to die. However, when combined with any of the reward hormones, it can lead to the compulsive sin of gluttony.
How strong is the power of hormones to enslave us? Is your willpower strong enough to overpower the urges created by ghrelin? If you truly seek the answer, try not eating anything for a day; a week; a month. How about for forty days? How about those hormones leading to addictions? How hard is it for a smoker to stop smoking? For an alcoholic to stop drinking? For a drug addict to stop taking drugs? For a sex addict to give up that lustful and perverse activity? All of the aforementioned addictions are the result of hormones. If we give in to those chemically–induced temptations, the functioning of our salt of DNA will change such that the truth of Jesus’ words will ring true. He tells us, "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin" (Jn. 8:34). In an Applied Sciences way, Jesus is warning us of the deleterious side effects of the biological interaction between hormones, cell receptors, etc. God revealed to St. Hildegard: when we engage in vice, we actually nourish our flesh, i.e. make it stronger, but not in a good way.[25]
A quick note. Some might be confused by the fact that Jesus suffered from hunger in the desert (Mt. 4:2, Lk. 4:2) and yet, at the same time, we know that he was not born with original sin. Aquinas explains this apparent contradiction thusly, “the penalties, such as hunger, thirst, death, and the like, which we suffer sensibly in this life flow from original sin. And hence Christ, in order to satisfy fully for original sin, wished to suffer sensible pain, that He might consume death and the like in Himself.”[26] Put another way, because Jesus’ body was completely subject to his human soul. He did not inherit original sin and, therefore, his soul possessed the power to will and allow his body to experience some of the consequences of original sin; this without having sinned himself. This is why St. Paul writes, “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21).
Then Their Eyes Were Opened
There is no doubt that concupiscence effects both body and soul. However, Genesis talks about a tree that imparts knowledge. In Crossing the Threshold of Hope, John Paul II tells us, everything in the intellect came to us first through the five senses.[27] The intellect is the capacity to know and to reason. The opening of their eyes really means receiving input from the five senses, i.e. sight, touch, hearing, taste, and smell, but without the supernatural grace to modulate the reasoned understanding of said knowledge gained from the sense-based input. Our fallen intellect can/does confuse physical good and evil with spiritual good and evil; apparent good (which would include evil disguised as good) and actual good. The power of hormones makes a clear and truthful understanding even harder to achieve.
Eve Eats, Adam Eats, Eyes Open
The biological heart is the most powerful component of the mouth[28] in expressing efficacious and coherent light. Thus, it is integral to our understanding of both Adam and Eve (Jesus and his mother, too). In the New Covenant, Jesus is described as the new Adam[29] (1 Cor 15:45) and Mary as the new Eve.[30],[31] The very first literal (and biological) one-flesh relationship in history i.e., that of Adam and Eve, provides us with a very significant piece of the puzzle concerning the events in the Garden; a piece of the puzzle that will lead us towards a deeper understanding of the fall and subsequent opening of their eyes. Another piece is put into place when we consider our first parents were the first partakers in the one-flesh nuptial mystery of love described by John Paul II in his Theology of the Body.[32] I think it would be safe to say that no greater intensity of intimate love existed, or would exist, between a man and a woman (Holy Family exempted, of course) than that which existed between our first parents prior to their fall from grace — prior to the damaging effects of concupiscence. In light of the heart’s quantum properties, let us again look at Genesis’ treatment of Adam and Eve’s fall.
Before she eats the fruit, the serpent tells Eve her eyes will be opened. So she eats. Are her eyes immediately opened? No! Does she immediately feel shame? No! Does she immediately have knowledge of good and evil? No! Did she immediately sin? Yes! Did she immediately lose supernatural grace? Yes; the Holy Spirit cannot dwell in an impure heart. With the loss of supernatural grace, did her soul immediately lose the ability for absolute control of the functioning of her DNA? Yes; no Holy Spirit ... no harmony/order (our fallen nature is a disordered human nature…body and soul). So, when were Eve’s eyes opened? When did she gain the knowledge of good and evil of which the Tree’s name promised? When did her DNA (her body) become disobedient and start seeking to satisfy its own brand of happiness? According to Scripture it was only after both of them ate that their eyes were opened and they felt shame; she ate, then he ate — then their eyes were opened. The use of the word, “then” in the first three chapters of Genesis indicates a natural sequence of events in time. The events occurring prior to the use of the word “then” are distinct, and chronologically precede the events described after the word. Here are a few examples: “God saw that it was good. Then [SML] God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness’” (Gen. 1:25-26); “a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground — then [SML] the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground” (Gen. 2:6-7); and finally, “…from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then [SML] the man said, ‘This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh’” (Gen. 2:22-23).
While Gen. 3:4-7 seems to indicate that Eve sinned first, this interpretation is admittedly less than a slam–dunk. So let us add some additional evidence. We will start with some other passages. Scripture tells us “Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (1 Tim 2:14). This passage would seem to indicate that Eve sinned first. In addition, there is this passage, “From a woman sin had its beginning, and because of her we all die” (Sir 25:24). This passage makes it much clearer that Eve did in fact sin first.
We can also consider the indisputable fact of Eve acting as a temptress who led Adam to sin. According to St. Catherine of Sienna, Adam’s only source of temptation was Eve. Even though Adam did not accept Eve’s persuasions, he gave into them through pride and a desire to please his spouse.[33] Obviously, Adam could not have pleased Eve unless he knew in advance, what it would take to please her. Consequently, she must have already given in to the devil's temptations and been actively seeking to persuade Adam to follow her in eating the apple. Even if they had both eaten the apple at the same time, she still had consented in her heart to the deed prior to Adam. Otherwise, she would not have tempted Adam. Eve was guilty of giving scandal to Adam. So what does the Church says about scandal? She tells us that scandal is a grave offense when the tempter deliberately leads another into a grave offense. Eve was fully aware of the prohibitions God had placed on both of them regarding the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil.
Based on a vision from God, St. Hildegard wrote, “Since the woman felt that she had become different [although feeling different, we know her eyes had not yet been opened because she had not yet felt shame as a consequence of the realization that she was naked. Thus, it is logical to assume that the ‘different’ was not the same as her eyes being opened – SML] through her enjoyment of the apple, she gave it also to her husband. Thus both of them lost their heavenly garment.”[34] What was that heavenly garment? God revealed to St. Hildegard that the flesh of fallen man was referred to as sheepskin. She writes, “In place of his luminous garment, Adam was given a sheepskin, and God substituted for Paradise a place of exile.”[35] This is significant. God refers to sheepskin. Therefore, it becomes clear that he is not referring to the fig leaf. He is referring to the flesh that lost its luminous garment. A garment that was capable being/mediating/radiating both physical and spiritual light.
Before she eats the fruit, the serpent tells Eve her eyes will be opened. So she eats. Are her eyes immediately opened? No! Does she immediately feel shame? No! Does she immediately have knowledge of good and evil? No! Did she immediately sin? Yes! Did she immediately lose supernatural grace? Yes; the Holy Spirit cannot dwell in an impure heart. With the loss of supernatural grace, did her soul immediately lose the ability for absolute control of the functioning of her DNA? Yes; no Holy Spirit ... no harmony/order (our fallen nature is a disordered human nature…body and soul). So, when were Eve’s eyes opened? When did she gain the knowledge of good and evil of which the Tree’s name promised? When did her DNA (her body) become disobedient and start seeking to satisfy its own brand of happiness? According to Scripture it was only after both of them ate that their eyes were opened and they felt shame; she ate, then he ate — then their eyes were opened. The use of the word, “then” in the first three chapters of Genesis indicates a natural sequence of events in time. The events occurring prior to the use of the word “then” are distinct, and chronologically precede the events described after the word. Here are a few examples: “God saw that it was good. Then [SML] God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness’” (Gen. 1:25-26); “a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground — then [SML] the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground” (Gen. 2:6-7); and finally, “…from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then [SML] the man said, ‘This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh’” (Gen. 2:22-23).
While Gen. 3:4-7 seems to indicate that Eve sinned first, this interpretation is admittedly less than a slam–dunk. So let us add some additional evidence. We will start with some other passages. Scripture tells us “Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (1 Tim 2:14). This passage would seem to indicate that Eve sinned first. In addition, there is this passage, “From a woman sin had its beginning, and because of her we all die” (Sir 25:24). This passage makes it much clearer that Eve did in fact sin first.
We can also consider the indisputable fact of Eve acting as a temptress who led Adam to sin. According to St. Catherine of Sienna, Adam’s only source of temptation was Eve. Even though Adam did not accept Eve’s persuasions, he gave into them through pride and a desire to please his spouse.[33] Obviously, Adam could not have pleased Eve unless he knew in advance, what it would take to please her. Consequently, she must have already given in to the devil's temptations and been actively seeking to persuade Adam to follow her in eating the apple. Even if they had both eaten the apple at the same time, she still had consented in her heart to the deed prior to Adam. Otherwise, she would not have tempted Adam. Eve was guilty of giving scandal to Adam. So what does the Church says about scandal? She tells us that scandal is a grave offense when the tempter deliberately leads another into a grave offense. Eve was fully aware of the prohibitions God had placed on both of them regarding the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil.
Based on a vision from God, St. Hildegard wrote, “Since the woman felt that she had become different [although feeling different, we know her eyes had not yet been opened because she had not yet felt shame as a consequence of the realization that she was naked. Thus, it is logical to assume that the ‘different’ was not the same as her eyes being opened – SML] through her enjoyment of the apple, she gave it also to her husband. Thus both of them lost their heavenly garment.”[34] What was that heavenly garment? God revealed to St. Hildegard that the flesh of fallen man was referred to as sheepskin. She writes, “In place of his luminous garment, Adam was given a sheepskin, and God substituted for Paradise a place of exile.”[35] This is significant. God refers to sheepskin. Therefore, it becomes clear that he is not referring to the fig leaf. He is referring to the flesh that lost its luminous garment. A garment that was capable being/mediating/radiating both physical and spiritual light.
The Inner (Spiritual) and Biological Heart Holds the Key
The account of Adam and Eve’s fall is a perfect example of the deeper meaning of the one body, one flesh wording seen in various parts of Sacred Scripture — a deeper understanding supported by research. Adam and Eve were two bodies — but one flesh; literal, but meta-sense-able.[36] Eve’s eyes were not immediately opened after her sin because Adam had not yet sinned. Because he had not yet sinned, his inner heart was still perfectly pure. His salt of DNA was still completely subject to his perfectly pure soul. His scriptural mouth/body — especially the biological heart of his mouth, would have been generating a perfectly coherent quantum field, which would have affected Eve. In the language of the body, Adam’s scriptural mouth perfectly expressed the purity of his heart!
- “On the last day of the feast, the great day, Jesus stood up and proclaimed, ‘If any one thirst, let him come to me and drink. He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.’ Now this he said about the Spirit” (Jn 7:37-39). This “living water” represents the Actual graces being radiated/sent out by the human mouth that will in turn affect others around us.
- “You brood of vipers! How can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Mt 12:34).
- “For it is from within, from the human heart [emphasis SML], that evil intentions come: fornication, theft, murder, adultery, avarice, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, folly” (Mk 7:21-22).
- Jesus tells St. Faustina that “I am Love and Mercy itself. When a soul approaches Me with trust, I fill it with such an abundance of graces that it cannot contain them within itself, but radiates them to other souls [emphasis SML]; [St. Maria Faustina Kowalska, Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska, Congregation of Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy (Poland: Congregation Of Marians, 1987; Marian Press, 2005), n. 1074. Used with permission of the Marian Fathers of the Immaculate Conception of the B.V.M.].” Author’s Note: it is only through the body that Love can be sent[37], and only through the body that it can be breathed in.[38],[39] This is known as the ebb and flow of God and the inhaling and exhaling of the Breath by the soul.
- Fulton Sheen so completely viewed himself as an earthen vessel (the mouth through which the overflow of the inner heart is sent out) that he titled his autobiography, Treasure in Clay. In Sheen’s book, The Mystical Body of Christ, he wrote, “The graces of God are communicated [sent out – SML] through ‘frail vessels [emphasis SML]’” [Fulton J. Sheen, The Mystical Body of Christ (Kindle Locations 215-218), Ave Maria Press]. The body is the frail vessel, not the soul. In fallen man, the soul is weak, which is not the same as frail.
Soul versus Spirit; Inner Heart versus Biological Heart
As Scripture tells us, “I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances” (Ezekiel 36:25-27). At first glance, this wording seems to be contradictory to our traditional understanding of the connotation of flesh in Scripture. In general, the flesh tends to be at war with our spirit (Gal 5:17). In the above passage, however, our heart of flesh is tied to a new spirit put within us because of our newfound cleanness.
The heart of flesh is an obvious reference to our human heart of flesh. Since our soul is the substantial form of the body (CCC n. 365), it would be beneficial to gain a better understanding of passages that refer to soul and spirit. St. Paul writes about the spirit in such a way that it seems to distinguish it from both the body and the soul. He writes: “May the God of peace himself make you perfectly holy and may you entirely, spirit, soul, and body, be preserved blameless for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 5:23). He also writes, “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.” (Heb 4:12).
In Gaudium et Spes, Pope Paul VI writes, “Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they [i.e., the elements of the material world] are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator.[41],[42] For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honor since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day [Gaudium et Spes 14 § 1; cf. Dan 3:57-80].” This is why our biological mouth expresses and sends out the overflow of heart of the spiritual soul. It is also why the heart of flesh described in Ez 36:25-27 is also good when it is subject to the new spirit within us after the cleansing waters of Baptism.
In Deut. 6:4 it reads, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” This wording helps us to understand the different powers within the one single spiritual soul.[43] The heart represents our free will, the presence or absence of holy desire for God. The soul represents the lower portion of the one spiritual soul that directs all functions of the body.[44],[45] The mind represents the intellectual faculties of the one spiritual soul.[46] After all, one cannot love what one does not know, thus one created in the image and likeness of God must possess reasoned intellect. Putting these three together, we can say that the mind feeds the desires of the heart through knowledge of Truth, which incites the soul to cause the body (the mouth) to send Love into the visible/physical world in the language of the body, of which the heart of flesh is critically important.
We must not believe that the different powers of the soul represent a duality. For example, the spirit is not in a compartment that is separated from the soul and the mind, and vice versa. It is one spiritual soul. In #367 of the Catechism, it reads, “Sometimes the soul is distinguished from the spirit: St. Paul for instance prays that God may sanctify his people ‘wholly’, with ‘spirit and soul and body’ kept sound and blameless at the Lord's coming [1 Thess 5:23]. The Church teaches that this distinction does not introduce a duality [SML] into the soul [cf. Council of Constantinople IV (870): DS 657]. ‘Spirit’ signifies that from creation[,] man is ordered to a supernatural end and that his soul can gratuitously be raised beyond all it deserves to communion with God” [cf. Vatican Council I, Dei Filius: DS 3005; Gaudium et Spes 22 § 5; Humani Generis: DS 3891].
This unity of the one spiritual soul is important to the topic of this blog. Durrwell writes, “It is there, in our hearts [i.e., the human spirit — SML], in the intimate depths of the believer, that the Spirit chooses his dwelling. In God himself the Holy Spirit of God reaches the ‘depths’ (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10). He is, as it were, the heart of God.”[47],[48],[49] Because the soul is not a duality, the Spirit’s dwelling in the heart would inescapably produce a profound impact on the entire spiritual soul; spirit, soul, and mind.
In the intellect/mind, the Holy Spirit teaches all Truth. In the spirit, the free will, which chooses either to love God or – through disordered pride – to love ourselves. By willing the former, the Holy Spirit purifies our heart and fills it with holy desire for God. It does so through the Holy Spirit directing the soul, which, in turn, directs all the functions of the body. Thus, the body is purified so that when it sends out the overflow of the inner heart (the human spirit) of man, the language of the body employed will make it possible to accurately[50] express the purity which is the overflow of the inner heart. Matthew writes, “The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is healthy, your whole body [SML] will be full of light; but if your eye is unhealthy, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness [think deeply about this phrase — emphasis SML], how great is the darkness!” (Mt 6:22-23). Biologically speaking, science reveals us that if the heart of flesh is beating (alive), it will produce light (electromagnetic radiation). If the Holy Spirit dwells in our inner heart/spirit, this light is living water. If the only thing dwelling in the inner heart is evil, the light will be darkness.
John Paul II tells us, it is only through the body, and in the language of the body, that the invisible, i.e. the spiritual and the divine, is made visible within creation.[51] He also tells us, “The body speaks not merely with the whole external expression of masculinity and femininity, but also with the internal structures of the organism, of the somatic [the entire body and its aggregate parts such as the heart of flesh] and psychosomatic [relating to the mind/mental] reaction.”[52]
The Human Heart of Flesh
Testimony of Saints and Jesus in the Eucharist:
Testimony of the Saints
Here are some examples from the saints of the efficacy of the physical human heart effected by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and in communicating the grace (living water) of the Holy Spirit to others.
- St Gertrude the Great had a great devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. As a result of her purity of heart, she was granted a mystical encounter with St. John the Evangelist, the beloved Apostle who was given the singular honor of resting his head on the bosom/heart of Jesus during the Last Supper. In the Spirit, St. John took her to Jesus so that she, too, could lay her head on the bosom of Jesus. Then, as she felt the constant pulsations (the spiritual heart does not pulsate) of the Divine Heart, and rejoiced exceedingly [*Note] thereat, she said to St. John: “Beloved of God, didst not thou feel those pulsations when thou wert lying on the Lord’s breast at the Last Supper?” “Yes,” he replied; “and this with such plenitude, that liquid does not enter more rapidly into bread than the sweetness of those pleasures penetrated my soul [clearly indicating Jesus’ physical – pre-crucified – heart (at the Last Supper, in St. John’s case) and resurrected glorified heart (in St. Gertrude’s case) — SML], so that my spirit [i.e., his spiritual heart] became more ardent than water under the action of a glowing fire.”[53] Note that the sweet pleasures of Jesus’ beating physical heart penetrated St. John’s soul.
This would be an opportune time to elaborate a little further on Ezekiel 36:25-27. As you may recall, God tells Ezekiel about his being washed and receiving a new spirit — about his heart of stone being replaced with a heart of flesh. This is a perfect example of why this must occur in order for us to be in the image and likeness of God. Jesus is likened to the cornerstone of the New Covenant temple. This is to help us understand that Jesus is unchangeable Truth incarnate. However, when it comes to truly understanding the reason that God designed us with a biological heart of flesh versus a heart of stone, we have to dig deeper. The miracles being discussed now, combined with the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which pulsates and radiates light, helps us to achieve this deeper understanding. St. John was spiritually and physically affected by Jesus’ physical heart at the Last Supper, even prior to his body becoming glorified after his resurrection. The heart is that out of which living water flows, i.e. is sent out. A stone cannot radiate, send out, anything. A heart of stone is good for nothing.
God tells St. Catherine, “Keep in mind that each of you has your own vineyard. But every one is joined to your neighbors’ vineyards without any dividing lines. They are so joined together, in fact, that you cannot do good or evil for yourself without doing the same for your neighbors.”[54] Our bodies are not fences that help to keep our inner heart hidden from our neighbors. In fact, based on everything God is teaching us, I think it would be more accurate to describe our bodies as transmission towers that send out the overflow of our inner hearts
[*Note] This same physical heart that produces electromagnetic radiation with every pulsating beat of the heart. That produced great joy in someone outside of his own pre-glorified physical body. The same beating physical, yet glorified, heart seen in so many Eucharistic miracles, some of which will be discussed later. Also note: as will be revealed later, science has shown that the heart’s pulse wave energy communicates with, and affects, the entire body of the individual, as well as other individuals in proximity].
- Phillip Neri, “kept the longest vigils and received the most abundant consolations. In this catacomb, a few days before Pentecost [the descent of the Holy Spirit — SML] in 1544, the well-known miracle of his heart took place. Bacci describes it thus: ‘While he was with the greatest earnestness asking of the Holy [Spirit] His gifts, there appeared to him a globe of fire, which entered into his mouth [symbolizing his scriptural mouth, the body – SML] and lodged in his breast; and thereupon he was suddenly surprised with such a fire of love, that, unable to bear it, he threw himself on the ground, and, like one trying to cool himself, bared his breast to temper in some measure the flame which he felt .... all his body began to shake with a violent tremour; and putting his hand to his bosom, he felt by the side of his heart, a swelling about as big as a man's fist ... The cause of this swelling was discovered by the doctors who examined his body after death. The saint's heart had been dilated [expanded – SML] under the sudden impulse of love, and in order that it might have sufficient room to move, two ribs had been broken, and curved in the form of an arch. From the time of the miracle till his death, his heart would palpitate (beat — SML) violently whenever he performed any spiritual action [emphasis SML].”[55] This miracle shows that the Light of the Holy Spirit, who is Divine Light, produces a physical impact on the heart of flesh [which in turn helps us to understand the heart of flesh in Ez. 36:25-27 — SML]. For those who try to dismiss this by saying it was all spiritual, not physical, let us take a look at another miracle.
- St. Gemma Galgani: experienced the same sort of phenomenon, but with minor differences from those surrounding St. Neri. According to Glenn Dallaire:
St. Galgani experienced an increasingly intense burning beginning in the center of her heart and then radiating outward. She describes the sensation as a hot poker penetrating her, so intense she needed ice to cool it. This pain and burning was not merely spiritual, but also physical [SML]. The skin in the area of the heart was actually burned. When Venerable Father Germanus Ruoppolo C.P. placed a thermometer on the skin, the mercury immediately ascended to the upper limit of the gauge. This type of manifestation of the Spirit’s dwelling in the [inner, spiritual — SML] heart was experienced by St. Padre Pio (his skin temperature, especially during Mass, was over 120 degrees, the upper limit of the thermometer), and also St. Paul of the Cross. Galgani said that while this burning caused great pain to her body, she did not desire that excruciating pain to stop because of the sweetness it produced [just as was the case with St. John the Evangelist at the Last Supper and St. Gertrude — SML] in the very depths of her soul [i.e. the mouth/body breathed in the Divine, causing the inner heart to overflow and be expressed via the body, especially the human heart of flesh]. The palpitations of her physical [SML] heart during this phenomenon were so great, her chair and bed would shake, even though she herself remained quite calm. Like Phillip Neri, St. Gemma’s heart was also expanded. So much so that three of her ribs were broken at almost right angles. When her body was exhumed, physicians found that decomposition of the body had begun … except for the heart. It was found incorrupt, full of blood, fresh, healthy, and flexible. [**Note]”[56][**Note] Divine light does not create heat. The burning bush in Exodus 3:2 was not consumed by the flame. Consuming heat can only be generated by physical created light. Heat is the result of a photon traveling in a waveform that interacts with the electrons of physical matter with which it comes into contact, such as the flesh in close proximity to the physical heart. This contact causes energy transference, which results in the generation of heat. Since a sine wave can only exist in time, it cannot be Divine Light because Divine Light is not material and is outside of time and space. Consequently, we can assume the physical changes occurring in the previously mentioned saint’s hearts, were not a direct manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Instead, they were consequences of the Holy Spirit’s presence within the spirit (inner heart), which compelled the soul to produce the necessary changes in the body so that the language of the body would accurately express the overflow of the spirit.
Evidence Gleaned From Eucharistic Miracles
- The first occurred in 750 A.D. at a church in the Italian town of Lanciano. When the veil of bread and wine were miraculously withdrawn from a consecrated host, human flesh and blood appeared! While this happened in the 8th century, several scientific tests have since been performed. The testing revealed that the flesh was from a human heart, and the blood was the same type as was Jesus’ blood? The flesh, in section, was determined to have present: 1) the myocardium, which is the part of the heart that generates the largest electromagnetic field in the body; 2) the vagus nerve, which is responsible for sending messages from the heart to the larynx (the voice box. Remember the passages concerning the lambs knowing the voice of incarnate God) and on to the brain, and; 3) the left ventricle, which is the part of the heart that pumps the electromagnetic irradiated blood (composed mostly of water) through the body.[57]
- The second miracle occurred in 2008 when a consecrated host was inadvertently dropped onto the ground during a Mass celebrated in the eastern Polish town of Sokolka. Following Church practice, the priest placed the consecrated host in water to dissolve it, which would normally result in the cessation of the Real Presence of Jesus in the consecrated host. Several days later, however, a nun found that the consecrated host had not dissolved completely. She discovered that a red mark had appeared on its surface. The red mark appeared to be blood, but was, in fact, human tissue. Two medical doctors separately determined the tissue was heart muscle tissue (from the myocardium).[58]
- The third Eucharistic miracle took place in Buenos Aires, Argentina in 1996. Once again, a consecrated host was dropped on the ground and subsequently placed in water to dissolve. After about nine days, it took on the appearance of blood and tissue. Samples were then sent to three different laboratories for analysis (circa 1996, 1999, and 2004). The last two labs were not informed of the story behind, or origin of, the samples, except to say that they were from a man who died. The results showed that the samples contained both red and white blood cells (only white blood cell contain nuclear DNA). The tissue was determined to be heart muscle tissue (myocardia) from the left ventricle.[59] Are you ready to be amazed? The blood cells were found to be alive and functioning. The cells from the heart muscle tissue were found to be moving and still beating [still generating electromagnetic radiation — SML]. Dr. Frederick Zugibe determined the tissue was from a man whose heart had been severely traumatized. The blood type and DNA exactly matched the blood/tissue sample from Lanciano and, therefore, were from the same person. The blood samples were determined to be 100% identical to blood samples taken from the Shroud of Turin and from the Sudarium of Oviedo (thought to be part of the burial cloth that had been wrapped around the head of Jesus).[60],[61] The Church has not yet ruled on the authenticity of these miracles.
Overflow of the Heart
Let’s look at some Bible passages that deal with living water flowing from our hearts.
- “The good man out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure produces evil; for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks” (Lk 6:45).
- “You brood of vipers! How can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Mt 12:34).
- “Are you still so dull? ‘Jesus asked them. Don’t you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of a person’s mouth come from the heart, and these defile them” (Mt 15:16-18).
- “On the last day of the feast, the great day, Jesus stood up and proclaimed, “If any one thirst, let him come to me and drink. He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.’” Now this he said about the Spirit, which those who believed in him were to receive; for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (Jn 7:37-39).
- “Come to him, to that living stone, rejected by men but in God’s sight chosen and precious; and like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (Pt 2:4-5).
This ends Part I of this blog series that attempts to remedy a general lack of sufficient understanding, as Cardinal Ratzinger described it, about Original Sin. Specific questions answered were: 1) what was the knowledge classified as good & evil; 2) what is the meaning of Adam and Eve’s eyes being opened; 3) does our DNA have anything to do with concupiscence, and; 4) what does the spirit and the soul have to do with this understanding?
Endnotes
[1] Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, Ratzinger Report: An Exclusive Interview on the State of the Church, (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1985), p. 79-80.
[2] Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich, The Life of Jesus Christ and Biblical Revelations, as recorded in the Journals of Clemens Brentano, arranged and edited by Carl E Schmoger CSSR, Vol 1 of 4, pp. 6-8.
[3] John Paul II, in his general audience of February 20, 1980, “ Man Enters the World as a Subject of Truth and Love,” Theology of the Body, Libreria Editrice Vaticana (Third Millennium Media L.L.C., The Faith Database L.L.C., 2008), n. 4
[4] CCC, n. 687.
[5] Leo XIII, Divinum Illud Munus, (Third Millennium Media L.L.C., The Faith Database L.L.C., 2008), n. 3.
[6] Hildegard of Bingen’s Book of Divine Works: With Letters and Song. All rights reserved. http://www.Innertraditions.com Reprinted with permission of publisher. Kindle Locations 2548-2552.
[7] John Ming, "Concupiscence, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4. (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908), (accessed July 24, 2020) <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04208a.htm>.
[8] Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947, n. 23.
[10] Ibid.
[11] St. Catherine of Siena, The Dialogue, trans. Suzanne Noffke, O.P (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1980), 86.
[14] Hildegard of Bingen, Scivias, trans. Columba Hart and Jane Bishop (New York: Paulist Press, 1990), 113.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid., 417.
[17] Ibid., 257-258.
[18] Tristan Lavender, “No more shame?,” Universiteit Leiden, http://www.leidenuniv.nl/en/researcharchive/index.php3-m=&c=319.htm: Universiteit Leiden, May 8, 2007 (accessed 10/21/2008).
[19] Wendy Zukerman, “Stress Gives Reef Fish Wonky Ears,” http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/04/27/2553465.htm: ABC Science, April 27, 2009 (accessed 04/27/2009).
[20] Dr. Norman Doidge, The Brain That Changes Itself, (New York, NY, Penguin Books, 2007), 114.
[21] Hormone Health Network, “Hormones and Health,” Endocrine Society, http://www.hormone.org/hormones-and-health/what-do-hormones-do, January 1, 2008 (accessed May 29, 2008).
[22] Doidge, The Brain That Changes Itself, 119.
[23]. Ibid.
[25] Hildegard, Scivias, 269.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Christopher West, Theology of the Body Explained (Boston, MA: Pauline Books and Media, 2003), 43.
[28] From the standpoint of the mouth in Scripture, we can describe the meaning thusly: Any expression that sends out a thought is a word, verbal or otherwise. With that in mind, let us proceed with our discussion of the mouth. In Scripture, the mouth is used to denote that by which is sent out the overflow of the inner heart of man (light or darkness). It also takes in that which either enlightens (through the grace of the Holy Spirit) or darkens (feeds the pride and lust of the heart). For man, the mouth is the entire body. Depending upon the individual circumstances, various parts of the body may play a more or less prominent role in a particular expression. Obviously, God does not have a physical mouth. So when we read in Scripture of the “mouth” of God (cf. 1 Kgs 8:15), are we to interpret it as a metaphor that helps us to understand that He is communicating? Let’s apply our understanding of being “sent” to the Trinity. In Scripture, it is only the Word of God (Jn. 3:17; 5:23) and the Holy Spirit (Jn. 14:26) who are described as being sent. The Father is never described as such. The Father is always the one who sends. The Father is not expressed; the Father is the one who expresses. In Scripture, it is the mouth that sends the Word. Through the incarnate Word of God is also sent the Breath, i.e. the Holy Spirit (cf. Jn. 20:21-23; Is. 55:10-11). When a human wishes to say something, the words will not be sent out without the accompanying breath. Scripture tells us that “man does not live by bread alone, but that man lives by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord” (Deut. 8:3). Further note: It could potentially lead to theological error to believe that the Holy Spirit is ‘sent’ in the same manner as the Son is sent. Only the Son is expressed. The Holy Spirit proceeds. Having issued that proviso, the current context is sufficient to understand the meaning of the ‘mouth’ of God.
[29] According to Venerable Maria of Agreda, “Adam in regard to the body was so like unto Christ that scarcely any difference existed. According to the soul, Adam was similar to Christ.” Venerable Maria of Agreda, City of God, Volume I, “The Conception,” (Washington, NJ: Blue Army), p. 127.
[30] Ibid. “From Adam God formed Eve so similar to the Blessed Virgin, that she was like unto her in personal appearance and in figure.”
[31] Anthony Maas. "Virgin Birth of Christ." The Catholic Encyclopedia. (Third Millennium Media L.L.C., The Faith Database L.L.C., 2008).
[32] West, Theology of the Body Explained, 12-19.
[33] Catherine of Siena, The Dialogue, 277-278.
[34] Robert Cunningham, Rev. Jerry Dybdal, and Ron Miller trans, Hildegard of Bingen's Book of Divine Works: With Letters and Songs, ed. Matthew Fox (Santa Fe, New Mexico: Inner Traditions Bear & Company. Kindle Edition, June 1, 1987), Kindle Locations 653-654.
[35]. Hildegard of Bingen. Hildegard of Bingen’s Book of Divine Works: With Letters and Songs. Translated by Robert Cunningham, Jerry Dybdal, and Ron Miller. Edited by Matthew Fox. (Santa Fe, NM: Inner Traditions International/Bear & Company, ©1987) All rights reserved. http://www.Innertraditions.com Reprinted with permission of publisher. Kindle Locations 657-658.
[36] We need to introduce and define two terms that have been coined by me for use in STOSS. They are sense-able and meta-sense-able. Pope St. John Paul II said, “The body, in fact, and it alone is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiritual and divine. It was created to transfer into the visible reality of the world, the mystery hidden since time immemorial in God. [John Paul II, in his general audience of February 20, 1980, “Man Enters the World as a Subject of Truth and Love,” Theology of the Body, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, n. 4]” As profound as this statement is, I would nevertheless like to modify it slightly. In order to incorporate STOSS into its understanding, it would read: The body, and it alone is capable of transferring the spiritual and divine into physical creation, and doing so through the sense-able and meta-sense-able language of the body. One of the components of any expression sent via the body is that it is sense-able, i.e. when sent in the presence of a witness, the expression will be perceived by one or more of the witness’ five unaided senses. There is also a component of the expression that cannot be heard, tasted, touched, seen, and/or smelled by the naked (unaided) senses. However, it can be sensed, either directly or indirectly, through the aid of instrumentation or sensor. While the word meta-sense-able describes something invisible to the naked eye, it is not to be confused with the “spiritual and divine” to which John Paul II refers. Something that is meta-sense-able belongs to the classification of physical matter/creation.
[37] John Paul II, in his general audience of February 20, 1980, “ Man Enters the World as a Subject of Truth and Love,” Theology of the Body, ©Libreria Editrice Vaticana (Third Millennium Media L.L.C., The Faith Database L.L.C., 2008), n. 4.
[38] cf. Francois-Xavier Durrwell, Holy Spirit of God (original English translation published by Geoffrey Chapman, a division of Cassell, Ltd., 1986; reprint published by Servant Books, Cinncinati, OH, 2006), 31, 179-180.
[39] cf. Catherine of Siena, The Dialogue, 289.
[40] Concupiscence refers to the disorder between body and soul. However, in this sentence I am focusing on the physical part of the disorder existing in fallen man.
[41] This text is extremely theologically rich. God revealed to St. Hildegard that man was designed and created by God to be a microcosm of all creation. When man glorifies God, all creation glorifies God. When man fell, all of creation fell. The works of man are manifested through the body, and in the language of the body, which is both sense-able and meta-sense-able.
Hildegard writes, “The elements are indeed subjected to man, and they each perform their duties as they themselves are affected by the works of man. For if people meddle with one another in battles, horrors, in hatred, envy and sinful offenses, the elements change into another and opposite kind of heat or cold or violent effusions and deluges. This stems from the first determination of God, because God arranged the elements in such a way that each one should behave corresponding to the works of men, since they are affected by these works when man creates with and in them (Causes and Cures, p. 95)” [Helmut Posch, The True Conception of the World According to Hildegard von Bingen, Trans by Dean H. Kenyon, (Mount Jackson: The Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation, 2015), p. 131.].
[42] Hildegard writes, "Of all the strengths of God's creation, Man's is most profound, made in a wondrous way with great glory from the dust of the earth and so entangled with the strengths of the rest of creation that he can never be separated from them." [Hildegard of Bingen, Scivias, trans. Columba Hart and Jane Bishop (New York: Paulist Press, 1990), 98, http://www.questia.com/read/101095222/scivias.].
[43] Catherine of Siena, The Dialogue, 32, 103-104, 277.
[44] Hildegard of Bingen, Scivias, trans. Columba Hart and Jane Bishop (New York: Paulist Press, 1990), 151, http://www.questia.com/read/101095275/scivias.
[47] Francois-Xavier Durrwell, Holy Spirit of God (original English translation published by Geoffrey Chapman, a division of Cassell, Ltd., 1986; reprint published by Servant Books, Cinncinati, OH, 2006), 36-37.
[48] cf. St. Hildegard of Bingen, Scivias (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist”Press, 1990), 35.
[49] cf. Rev. Edward Leen, The Holy Spirit, (New York, NY: Sheed & Ward, 1939; Sceptor Publishers, 1998, 2008), 32-33.
[50] If the body and soul were not equally pure, God’s justice would require that the body would merit a different place in heaven or hell than the soul.
[51] John Paul II, “The Language of the Body in the Structure of Marriage,” Theology of the Body, n. 7.
[52]. John Paul II, in his general audience of Sept. 5, 1984, “Responsible Parenthood Linked to Moral Maturity,” Theology of the Body, ©Libreria Editrice Vaticana (Third Millennium Media L.L.C., The Faith Database L.L.C., 2008), n. 1.
[53]. St. Gertrude the Great, Life and Revelations of St. Gertrude the Great, TAN Books, Kindle Edition, pp. 303-304.
[54] Catherine of Siena, The Dialogue, trans. Suzanne Noffke (New York: Paulist Press, 1980), 62, http://www.questia.com/read/98854546/the-dialogue.
[55]. Ritchie, Charles Sebastian. “St. Philip Romolo Neri.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 12. (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911). http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12018b.htm. Nov. 5, 2017 (accessed Dec. 6, 2017).
[56]. Glenn Dallaire, “St Gemma Galgani.” Glen Dallaire. http://www.stgemmagalgani.com/2008/11/heart-on-fire-with-love-of-god-st-gemma.html, January 21, 2013 (accessed 11/05/2017).
[57]. Venerable Carlo Acutis, “The Eucharistic Miracles of the World: Poland, Sokolka, 2008,” Associazione Amici di Carlo Acutis, http://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/Liste/scheda_b.html?nat=italia&wh=lanciano&ct=Lanciano,%20750%20D.C., accessed 11/18/2016.
[58]. Venerable Carlo Acutis, “The Eucharistic Miracles of the World: Poland, Sokolka, 2008,” Associazione Amici di Carlo Acutis, http://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/Liste/scheda_c.html?nat=polonia&wh=sokolka&ct=Sok%C3%B3%C5%82ka%202008, accessed 11/18/2016.
[59]. Venerable Carlo Acutis, “The Eucharistic Miracles of the World: Argentina, Buenos Aries, 1992-1994-1996,” Associazione Amici di Carlo Acutis, http://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/Liste/scheda_c.html?nat=argentina&wh=buenosaires&ct=Buenos%20Aires,%201992-1994-1996, accessed 11/18/2016.
[60]. Deacon Donald Cox, "This Is My Body—This Is My Blood," Catholic Journal US, http://www.catholicjournal.us/2012/03/30/this-is-my-body-this-is-my-blood/, March 30, 2012 (accessed 9/07/12).
[61]. cf. Carlo Acutis, “The Eucharistic Miracles of the World: Argentina, Buenos Aries, 1992-1994-1996,” Associazione Amici di Carlo Acutis, http://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/Liste/scheda_c.html?nat=argentina&wh=buenosaires&ct=Buenos%20Aires,%201992-1994-1996, accessed 11/18/2016.
[62]. Catholic News Agency, “Check out this Eucharistic miracle in Poland,” CNA, http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/check-out-this-eucharistic-miracle-in-poland-96162/; April 18, 2016 (accessed 4/19/2016).
[63]. Venerable Carlo Acutis, “The Eucharistic Miracles of the World: Poland, Legnica, 2013,” Associazione Amici di Carlo Acutis, http://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/Liste/scheda_b.html?nat=polonia&wh=legnica&ct=Legnica,%202013, accessed 11/18/2016.
