J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
Does anyone have a list of Eastern Catholic Saints who didn’t decompose?
- Status
A
andrewstx
Guest
The ones I know of were Orthodox, St John Maximowitch (sp) of San Francisco and Shanghai. The monstery of the caves of Lavra has catacombs with incorrupts.
One Eastern Maronite I am aware of is St. Charbel. Their is a chapter about him in THE INCORRUPTABLES published by TAN.
I could be out of print by now.
One Eastern Maronite I am aware of is St. Charbel. Their is a chapter about him in THE INCORRUPTABLES published by TAN.
I could be out of print by now.
H
Hesychios
Guest
I for one don’t believe that there are any incorruptibles. I guess that is the modern skeptic in me.
A close examination will probably find some some (probably multiple) forms of decomposition in every case, it’s just that every case is unique and some go faster than others.
This is more like wishful thinking, not really something to get all worked up over.
A
andrewstx
Guest
You can venerate the relic of St John at the Russian Orthodox cathedral on Geary st. in SFCA
H
Hesychios
Guest
Yes, I know. I just don’t take the claim of incorruptibility seriously, no matter who makes it.
J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
I disagree. This only happens in Christianity. A tool against atheists, I have employed it multiple times. Then they struggle to come up with some “profound” explanation which always end in them changing the topic, and me winning the argument: score one for the boys back in Rome.
H
Hesychios
Guest
… And sighing deeply in spirit, he saith “Why doth this generation seek a sign? Amen, I say to you, a sign shall not be given to this generation.”
Mk 8:13 D-R
L
Luvtosew
Guest
I
iohanne
Guest
Nope. There’s a Buddhist monk who supposedly is incorruptible. Look 'em up.
J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
Thanks for the verse. Are your sure that buddhist is not mummified (ie if in a cave in snowy mountains), he could have died and literally have been mummified by the weather due to low moisture, etc. The Incorupptables by TAN books heavily explains the difference between mummification and incorruptability.
I
iohanne
Guest
I’m not very informed on the subject but supposedly he just meditated himself to death. And he remained incorruptible. He’s still in the lotus position when you see him.
J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
Please note that the Vatican uses science to prove incorruptability among other miracles and is extremely srupulous when it come to these instances. I heard somewhere on CAF that a beatus was almost canonized, but the person who was cured of cancer sadly had their cancer come back (hence no canonization). Along with this is the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, where the UN actually tested it and ruled that science cannot explain it.
Some holy people do remain better than others as far as the “level” of how incorrupt they are. John of Shanghai is ok, could be better.
J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
I think I heard this on History Channel once.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
I’ve really got to wonder about stories in which the UN is testing things. 
J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
Just because I can…
From the Real Prescence.org
"…Archbishop of Lanciano and
the Provincial Superior of the Conventual
Franciscans at Abruzzo, with Rome’s approval,
requested Dr. Edward Linoli, director of
the hospital in Arezzo and professor of anatomy,
histology, chemistry, and clinical microscopy, to
perform a thorough scientific examination on the
relics of the miracle which had occurred twelve
centuries earlier. On March 4, 1971, the professor
presented a detailed report of the various studies
carried out. Here are the basic results:
the chief Advisory Board of the World Health
Organization appointed a scientific commission to
corroborate Linoli’s findings. Their work lasted 15
months and included 500 tests. It was verified that
the fragments taken from Lanciano could in no
way be likened to embalmed tissue. As to the
nature of the fragment of flesh, the commission
declared it to be living tissue because it responded
rapidly to all the clinical reactions distinctive of
living beings. Their reply fully corroborated
Professor Linoli’s conclusions. In the extract summarizing
the scientific work of the Medical
Commission of the WHO and the UN, published
in Dec. 1976 in New York and Geneva, declared
that science, aware of its limits, has come to a halt,
face to face with the impossibility of giving
an explanation.
therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/english_pdf/Lanciano1.pdf
From the Real Prescence.org
"…Archbishop of Lanciano and
the Provincial Superior of the Conventual
Franciscans at Abruzzo, with Rome’s approval,
requested Dr. Edward Linoli, director of
the hospital in Arezzo and professor of anatomy,
histology, chemistry, and clinical microscopy, to
perform a thorough scientific examination on the
relics of the miracle which had occurred twelve
centuries earlier. On March 4, 1971, the professor
presented a detailed report of the various studies
carried out. Here are the basic results:
- The “miraculous Flesh" is authentic flesh
consisting of muscular striated tissue of the
myocardium. - The “miraculous Blood" is truly blood. The
chromatographic analysis indicated this with
absolute and indisputable certainty. - The immunological study shows with certitude that the flesh and the blood are human, and the immuno – hematological test allows us to
affirm with complete objectivity and certitude
that both belong to the same blood type AB – the
same blood type as that of the man of the Shroud
and the type most characteristic of Middle
Eastern populations. - The proteins contained in the blood have
the normal distribution, in the identical percentage
as that of the serous-proteic chart for normal
fresh blood. - No histological dissection has revealed any
trace of salt infiltrations or preservative substances
used in antiquity for the purpose of embalming.
Professor Linoli also discarded the hypothesis of
a hoax carried out in past centuries. This report
was published in The Sclavo Notebooks in
Diagnostics (Collection #3, 1971)
the chief Advisory Board of the World Health
Organization appointed a scientific commission to
corroborate Linoli’s findings. Their work lasted 15
months and included 500 tests. It was verified that
the fragments taken from Lanciano could in no
way be likened to embalmed tissue. As to the
nature of the fragment of flesh, the commission
declared it to be living tissue because it responded
rapidly to all the clinical reactions distinctive of
living beings. Their reply fully corroborated
Professor Linoli’s conclusions. In the extract summarizing
the scientific work of the Medical
Commission of the WHO and the UN, published
in Dec. 1976 in New York and Geneva, declared
that science, aware of its limits, has come to a halt,
face to face with the impossibility of giving
an explanation.
therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/english_pdf/Lanciano1.pdf
N
Nine_Two
Guest
That’s not quite the same thing.
At any rate, it was the concept of incorruptables, not eucharistic miracles that were questioned in this thread.
I have to agree with Hesychios, I’ve come across non-Christian accounts from time to time, in addition to the fact, which you yourself pointed out, that there are “levels” of incorruptability leads me to believe it has more to do with the state of the body itself, and the environment in which it is buried (both of which we know can cause such affects, embalming itself being the control of those two things to keep the body from rotting prematurely), rather than the state of the soul.
If every great saint was incorruptable I might be willing to change my mind, but so many of the greatest saints aren’t.
At any rate, it was the concept of incorruptables, not eucharistic miracles that were questioned in this thread.
I have to agree with Hesychios, I’ve come across non-Christian accounts from time to time, in addition to the fact, which you yourself pointed out, that there are “levels” of incorruptability leads me to believe it has more to do with the state of the body itself, and the environment in which it is buried (both of which we know can cause such affects, embalming itself being the control of those two things to keep the body from rotting prematurely), rather than the state of the soul.
If every great saint was incorruptable I might be willing to change my mind, but so many of the greatest saints aren’t.
J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
On the topic, do Orthodox have Eucharistic Miracles?
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
Yes. They are generally not seen positively but more as a sign that something has gone wrong, usually the priest doubting the reality of the consecration. I believe that is the story behind Lanciano as well, that the priest performed the consecration with doubt.
D
DL82
Guest
Are these that Japanese ones? They ate an odd diet of tree sap and mummified themselves from the inside.
Which raises the question, were all of the Catholic incorruptibles ascetics who fasted constantly and had very low muscle mass and body fat? I know some Eastern ascetics practiced xenophagia (sp?) where they ate only nuts, seeds, and oil - is it possible they mummified their own bodies? Are there any incorrupt bodies of saints who ate relatively normal diets?
J
John_of_Patmos
Guest
He was probably tibetan. The Incorruptables from TAN talks about diet, radiation, etc. The answer is no, it is not the cause. They mentioned that if this were true, many poor people would be incorrupt. Plus the Vatican tests for these things, only declaring a miracle when science can’t say why something occured.
- Status