Does anyone else doubt padre pio’s stigmata

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chicken_Pigeon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Chicken_Pigeon

Guest
I heard he used carbolic acid to make the stigmata himself and that he refused to show the stigmata to doctors and his superiors. Why would he do that if he was legit?

I don’t doubt his sainthood and I’m not trying to start a war or anything. It’s a serious question

Bokbok
 
Last edited:
Chicken_Pigeon said:
he refused to show the stigmata to doctors
Click to expand...
I can’t be bothered to go check the books but he was subjected to medical examination and a medical report was written about the stigmata. As with everything it stood the test of medical examination and the clinical evaluation found the properties of the stigmata inexplicable by itself.
 
I don’t mean to be mean or anti catholic but is incorruptibility really a thing? Or are they just not corrupting because they’re being kept in certain conditions by the church?

Bokbok
 
As far as I’m aware certain doctors were split

If it truly happened why don’t all doctors and science agree there was no foul play?

Bokbok
 
He was examined several times and his stigmata was found to be authentic and beyond doubt.
If I remember rightly he exhibited these wounds and other hidden ones for around fifty years but a little while before his death they disappeared, they didn’t heal up, they disappeared.

The talk of carbolic acid was an attempt to discredit him by someone who may have been, shall we say, jealous. His cell was searched quite a few times and nothing untoward was ever discovered.

I can research it more fully if you want but that is the truth of the matter.
 
Last edited:
Chicken_Pigeon said:
As far as I’m aware certain doctors were split

If it truly happened why don’t all doctors and science agree there was no foul play?

Bokbok
Click to expand...
Several reasons, from what I recall at least one doctor was radically against the possibility and simply wanted to denounce it regardless of truth. The doctor that wrote the favorable evaluation was actually an atheist that didn’t have any personal stake and thus wrote a completely neutral factual scientific report with a detailed description of the wounds - being that the properties of the wounds were mostly inexplicable and couldn’t have been self-inflicted or explained by any means he could thing of.
 
Last edited:
Carbolic acid was used on one occasion to cleanse during a flu epidemic I think but though his cell was searched several times on various occasions nothing untoward was ever found.

Padre Pio, now Saint Pio was and remains a very dearly loved saint whose authenticity is beyond doubt, as you’d expect from a man sainted by the Catholic Church…
 
Last edited:
I’m not saying he’s not a saint. I’m just saying it’s fishy

Bokbok
 
well out of humility initially he didn’t show anybody but soon the word spread to the Superior, out of holy obedience he pio didn’t show to the doctors ,to a point,he even had a surgery without sedative or anesthesia, its because he is holy his body is interrupt, we shouldn’t doubt it .Psalms 118:23 This is the Lord’s doing;it is marvelous in our eyes.
 
Padre Pio died more than 50 years ago. At this point in time, what difference does it make?

I suppose this is something which could be faked, but that doesn’t mean it was.
 
CP…

Ya see, there’s the rub. We know he is Saint. Therefore he is in heaven. Heaven isn’t “fishy”.

What he did while alive had several components. We know from an overall view his life and actions merited heaven.

We don’t know, nor should we fixate on individual actions. Look at St. Augustine’s early life.

Peace,
 
There is absolutely nothing fishy about it whatsoever.

He was investigated by his own superiors, he was found to be innocent. To cast aspersions on him now without any evidence whatsoever is very wrong.

We’re talking of a man who virtually never left his monastery, hardly wrote anything and yet was made a saint. He was exemplary.
 
Last edited:
Well I can believe that blessed Anne emerich is holy without believing the veracity of her written works. I believe Padre Pio is in heaven but I don’t have to believe everything about him

Bokbok
 
Someone else wrote and claimed it was Blessed Anne that said those things.
 
Last edited:
You certainly don’t have to believe things about St Pio if you haven’t actually researched him properly. That would be a mistake, I think.

St Pio pray for us.
 
Last edited:
Francis said:
its because he is holy his body is interrupt, we shouldn’t doubt it
Click to expand...
In the case of Padre Pio the body isn’t incorrupt. Just recently the body was examined and has the normal deterioration that would be expected.

In his case the body was embalmed. The specific circumstances that motivate that choice are probably complex but it wasn’t unusual with important public personas especially in that culture and time period. The clear distinction is made and the concept of incorruption does not apply to bodies that underwent embalming procedures.

The phenomenon of incorruption has been verified with many other saints throughout history and is -as everything with the saints- a matter of controversy incessantly being called into question. One notable example is Saint Francis of Paola especially because his incorruption was temporary and interrupted. Another example of an incorrupt body is Saint Elizabeth of Aragon who remains incorrupt without embalming techniques after 700 years.
 
Last edited:
What about Elizabeth of Aragon? She doesn’t look incorrupt to me…

Bokbok
 
Even the Vatican doubted him for a time and disallowed him to say mass and hear confessions.

Bokbok
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top