A question about stigmatics

[St_Redemption]

I don’t necessarily deny that this thing occurs, as it seems to make sense to me. Sharing in the suffering of Christ and the necessity of pain to align ourselves to Him is something that I have accepted. I also have accepted that miracles can and have occurred. One thing that bothers me when I read about stigmatics, though, is that the wounds of the nails appear on the palms of their hands. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe it is now widely known and accepted that, when crucified, a victims hands were nailed through the wrists, as nails through the palm of the hand could not generally support the weight of the victim.

All the statues and paintings and whatnot portray the nails through the hand, but we know that this is a popular misconception. So it seems odd that stigmatics receive the wounds in the same area where popular history has wrongly taught us that victims were nailed through when suffering crucifixion.

Maybe it could be true that wounds through the wrist are more likely to be fatal and functionally limiting, and maybe The Lord would not want that. But a fit of stigmata is going to cause one to be particularly functionally limited regardless. And a wound through the wrist need not be fatal or permanently paralyzing if the necessary arteries and nerves are avoided.

Thoughts?

 

[Deo_Gratias42]

There is apparently now strong supporting evidence that the Romans did nail the nail through a very painful nerve in the hand and tied the arms to the cross to support the weight of the crucified so the hands wouldn’t tear out. It was apparently a more painful way to die.

 

[St_Redemption]

There is apparently now strong supporting evidence that the Romans did nail the nail through a very painful nerve in the hand and tied the arms to the cross to support the weight of the crucified so the hands wouldn’t tear out. It was apparently a more painful way to die.

That’s interesting. Ill have to look into this. It’s not what I found when I first looked into it though.

 

[drforjc]

I don’t see what’s odd about it in any event. As an example, in some Marian apparitions Our Lady seems to take the physical appearance of the prevailing local race/ethnicity.

God could easily use what’s familiar to the individual to make His point more immediate and viscerally touching.

 

[St_Redemption]

I don’t see what’s odd about it in any event. As an example, in some Marian apparitions Our Lady seems to take the physical appearance of the prevailing local race/ethnicity.

God could easily use what’s familiar to the individual to make His point more immediate and viscerally touching.

“odd” might not have been the right word. “Suspicious” works better here.

 

[drforjc]

…but my answer stands regardless

 

[Joelle_M]

I don’t see what’s odd about it in any event. As an example, in some Marian apparitions Our Lady seems to take the physical appearance of the prevailing local race/ethnicity.

God could easily use what’s familiar to the individual to make His point more immediate and viscerally touching.

In support of your point of view…

catholicherald.com/stories/Nailed-through-wrists-or-hands,23812

 

[cjforJesus]

I don’t necessarily deny that this thing occurs, as it seems to make sense to me. Sharing in the suffering of Christ and the necessity of pain to align ourselves to Him is something that I have accepted. I also have accepted that miracles can and have occurred. One thing that bothers me when I read about stigmatics, though, is that the wounds of the nails appear on the palms of their hands. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe it is now widely known and accepted that, when crucified, a victims hands were nailed through the wrists, as nails through the palm of the hand could not generally support the weight of the victim.

All the statues and paintings and whatnot portray the nails through the hand, but we know that this is a popular misconception. So it seems odd that stigmatics receive the wounds in the same area where popular history has wrongly taught us that victims were nailed through when suffering crucifixion.

Maybe it could be true that wounds through the wrist are more likely to be fatal and functionally limiting, and maybe The Lord would not want that. But a fit of stigmata is going to cause one to be particularly functionally limited regardless. And a wound through the wrist need not be fatal or permanently paralyzing if the necessary arteries and nerves are avoided.

Thoughts?

It is not certainly known the exact placement of the nails,but the bible uses the word hand.
All stigmatics in history except a few modern ones showed the stigmata in the palm. St Pio is one of the most modern ones whose stigmata was photographed and studied exstensively.His was in the palm and through to the back of his hand.

A living human being would have to be crucified to test the assumption that the hand could not support the weight during crucifixion. All the tests to date have been on cadavers.

There have been several threads on this topic already.

 

[Memaw]

It is not certainly known the exact placement of the nails,but the bible uses the word hand.
All stigmatics in history except a few modern ones showed the stigmata in the palm. St Pio is one of the most modern ones whose stigmata was photographed and studied exstensively.His was in the palm and through to the back of his hand.

A living human being would have to be crucified to test the assumption that the hand could not support the weight during crucifixion. All the tests to date have been on cadavers.

There have been several threads on this topic already.

Read, “A Dr. at Calvary.” God Bless, Memaw

 

[Bookcat]

I don’t see what’s odd about it in any event. As an example, in some Marian apparitions Our Lady seems to take the physical appearance of the prevailing local race/ethnicity.

God could easily use what’s familiar to the individual to make His point more immediate and viscerally touching.

Right.

And those who understood the crucifixion as largely through the palms would have found it odd to have the stigmata elsewhere.

 

[cjforJesus]

Read, “A Dr. at Calvary.” God Bless, Memaw

Sorry but I do not know any physicians who were at the crucifixion.
I believe the nails were in the hand just as the bible states and also most stigmatists display.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Sorry but I do not know any physicians who were at the crucifixion.
I believe the nails were in the hand just as the bible states and also most stigmatists display.

The reference that was confusing was to a book that was published many years ago. The author was a European physician who was attempting to give his medical analysis to the accounts of the crucifixion. He did not claim to be at the crucifixion.

 

[cjforJesus]

The reference that was confusing was to a book that was published many years ago. The author was a European physician who was attempting to give his medical analysis to the accounts of the crucifixion. He did not claim to be at the crucifixion.

If he was not there he cannot make assumptions. We have the bible to clarify what is necessary to know.

 

[Bookcat]

I believe the nails were in the hand just as the bible states .

The Bibles does not state that…

The word use as I recall refer not to the palm of the hand exclusive but includes more of the forearm…

I recall the shroud has nails going through actually in an angle…involving part of the hand and the wrist.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

If he was not there he cannot make assumptions. We have the bible to clarify what is necessary to know.

I was explaining the opaque citation, not endorsing the correctness of the book or the author’s premise, thank you. I was once given a copy of the book countless years ago but I did not read it; I subsequently gave it away.

That said, I have found insightful the thoughts of physicians as they explain, for example, death by asphyxiation which is the primary cause of death in crucifixion. And, of course, when I taught Sacred Scripture, I was using many things in my lectures which were not in the Bible itself…not least, the findings of biblical archaeology.

 

[pianistclare]

I was explaining the opaque citation, not endorsing the correctness of the book or the author’s premise, thank you. I was once given a copy of the book countless years ago but I did not read it; I subsequently gave it away.

That said, I have found insightful the thoughts of physicians as they explain, for example, death by asphyxiation which is the primary cause of death in crucifixion. And, of course, when I taught Sacred Scripture, I was using many things in my lectures which were not in the Bible itself…not least, the findings of biblical archaeology.

So, Father, do you have a learned opinion on this that you would be willing to share?
I hear so many people banter this back and forth.
Do you think it matters, in the end?
I also think it’s interesting that those who have received the stigmata have wounds in the hands. All my life, I’ve never considered it would anything else.

 

[littlestsouls2]

Someone once asked St. Padre Pio why the wound in his side was on the opposite side to Our Lord’s wound (according to tradition). It would be too much, he said, if the wounds impressed upon him, exactly resembled the Holy Wounds of Our Saviour.

 

[St_Redemption]

Someone once asked St. Padre Pio why the wound in his side was on the opposite side to Our Lord’s wound (according to tradition). It would be too much, he said, if the wounds impressed upon him, exactly resembled the Holy Wounds of Our Saviour.

wow really?

 

[cjforJesus]

The Bibles does not state that…

The word use as I recall refer not to the palm of the hand exclusive but includes more of the forearm…

I recall the shroud has nails going through actually in an angle…involving part of the hand and the wrist.

I am fairly certain there are biblical verses which say 'hand". I will look them up for you though,

 

[cjforJesus]

[26] And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them. Jesus cometh, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said: Peace be to you. [27] Then he saith to Thomas: Put in thy finger hither, and see my HANDS; and bring hither thy hand, and put it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing. [28] Thomas answered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God. [29] Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed. [30] Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book.