"I am a Miracle: Woman Tells Story of Accident, Recovery" (account of healing by a miracle)

[mdgspencer]

This reporter at a Baton Rouge, Louisiana, daily was obviously deeply affected this woman’s striking account of her miraculous recovery, told last Sunday in a Catholic parish there. She had done a somersault over the handlebars of her bicycle onto her head. In a coma, she was brain dead for hours and the doctors said that if she survived, she would live in a vegetative state permanently. But some nuns prayed a novena to the founder of their order, asking God to heal her. Then she woke, recovered, from her coma. The Catholic Church officially declared it a miracle.
see theadvocate.com/home/3833240-125/i-am-a-miracle-woman

 

[Hokomai]

So, who are the “Physicians [who] told her family that even if she survived emergency surgery, she’d spend the rest of her life in a vegetative state”. What was the basis of this prognosis? Exactly when was it given? Are there records? If so, have they been published? Why do all these miracles stories include unnamed doctors expressing hopelessness, but treating the patient anywhere, and then declaring the cure a miracle? Might it not, in this case, have been related to the emergency surgery?

 

[mymamamary]

So, who are the “Physicians [who] told her family that even if she survived emergency surgery, she’d spend the rest of her life in a vegetative state”. What was the basis of this prognosis? Exactly when was it given? Are there records? If so, have they been published? Why do all these miracles stories include unnamed doctors expressing hopelessness, but treating the patient anywhere, and then declaring the cure a miracle? Might it not, in this case, have been related to the emergency surgery?

To one who has Faith, no explanation is nessescary, to one without Faith, no explanation is possible.-St. Thomas Aquinas

 

[georget]

So, who are the “Physicians [who] told her family that even if she survived emergency surgery, she’d spend the rest of her life in a vegetative state”. What was the basis of this prognosis? Exactly when was it given? Are there records? If so, have they been published? Why do all these miracles stories include unnamed doctors expressing hopelessness, but treating the patient anywhere, and then declaring the cure a miracle? Might it not, in this case, have been related to the emergency surgery?

I will pray for you

 

[Hokomai]

To one who has Faith, no explanation is nessescary, to one without Faith, no explanation is possible.-St. Thomas Aquinas

I wish people would stop quoting this 13th-century error in thinking at me. On what possible basis can it be held that people without faith cannot accept an explanation?

 

[Mijoy2]

I will pray for you

I think Hokomai’s questions are legitimate.

My mind always goes to the bell curve with such stories. With so many people in the world (billions) there are, of course, many accidents and illnesses with many eventual outcomes. Most will fall in line with the prognosis. Some (very few) will fall way outside the prognosis. Simple statistics. There are cases which fall on the negative side of the bell curve. A individual may go to a dentist to get a tooth cavity filled and die in the chair. The story of this thread, falls on the positive side of the bell curve.

I am not suggesting this is, or is not a miracle. I am only suggesting that events like this would occur in the natural world without divine intervention. They could not be miraculous, simply statistically possible.

To question such a thing would be prudent, not heretical or disrespectful. Now if all the patients in a cancer ward of a particular hospital were all “healed” in an instant, that might be more convincing it were not a natural phenomenon…

 

[johnnyjones]

So, who are the “Physicians [who] told her family that even if she survived emergency surgery, she’d spend the rest of her life in a vegetative state”. What was the basis of this prognosis? Exactly when was it given? Are there records? If so, have they been published? Why do all these miracles stories include unnamed doctors expressing hopelessness, but treating the patient anywhere, and then declaring the cure a miracle? Might it not, in this case, have been related to the emergency surgery?

The doctors names just aren’t listed. For the Catholic Church to declare a miracle an intense investigation must take place which the article indicates. I’m a big skeptic by nature and at times I wondered why the church didn’t declare some seemingly obvious occurrences miracles, but they need more investigative time or didn’t feel the occurrence reached the criteria of a miracle. I favor miracle in this case.

 

[mymamamary]

I wish people would stop quoting this 13th-century error in thinking at me. On what possible basis can it be held that people without faith cannot accept an explanation?

I’ll tell you why. Because, the adamant atheists, namely Dawkins and the late hitchens wouldn’t have accepted a miracle if it happened right in front of them. They would still deny anything happening, that’s how badly they blinded themselves to the TRUTH. Here were are as Catholics, offering bona fide evidence, yet all the atheists and you would say is : well either science caused it, or it didn’t happen. So you wouldn’t accept the explanation, hence the saying “to those without Faith, no explanation is possible”. No matter how I would explain the Faith to you, as the Faith is very logical and rational and atheism is very irrational and very illogical, you would deny it to your dying breath. Hoped that answered your question.

Don’t pull the blinds over your eyes, you wont be able to see

 

[ProdglArchitect]

I wish people would stop quoting this 13th-century error in thinking at me. On what possible basis can it be held that people without faith cannot accept an explanation?

It’s not a matter of “expecting” and explanation, it’s a matter of your ability to accept one. People with faith recognize the explanation, we are quite aware of it and accept it because it is perfectly within the bounds of possibility to us.

Someone like you, without faith, is incapable of accepting the explanation because it violently violates your perception of reality.

It’s similar to how making an argument for something based on the Bible is pointless to someone like you (note, I don’t actually know your opinions of the Bible, so this is more of a generalization based on non-believers I’ve engaged with in the past). It is impossible to use the Bible as a basis for an argument with someone like you because you reject it as a foundation for belief, therefore anything that stems from it must, by association, be worthless.

You are perfectly welcome to expect an explanation, the problem is that you are not willing to accept the explanation that is readily apparent to those with faith.

The rest of your argument though is fine, however, the Church does not declare miracles willy-nilly, and they spend a good deal of time making sure that there are no other explanations available to us. Only after all other possibilities (i.e. the emergency surgery you mentioned) have been exhausted does the Church begin to truly entertain the idea of divine intervention. As for the doctors being nameless, it is likely a matter of professional preservation. If you had medical doctors going around proclaiming miracles, I imagine even those with faith would be a little skeptical of taking their advice. I’d bet that they generally request that their names not be associated with it.

As for your coments about Aquinas, just becasue you disagree with them doesn’t make them in error. That itself is a fallacy of logic: Personal Incredulity

 

[SpeakInSilence]

I think Hokomai’s questions are legitimate.

My mind always goes to the bell curve with such stories. With so many people in the world (billions) there are, of course, many accidents and illnesses with many eventual outcomes. Most will fall in line with the prognosis. Some (very few) will fall way outside the prognosis. Simple statistics. There are cases which fall on the negative side of the bell curve. A individual may go to a dentist to get a tooth cavity filled and die in the chair. The story of this thread, falls on the positive side of the bell curve.

I am not suggesting this is, or is not a miracle. I am only suggesting that events like this would occur in the natural world without divine intervention. They could not be miraculous, simply statistically possible.

To question such a thing would be prudent, not heretical or disrespectful. Now if all the patients in a cancer ward of a particular hospital were all “healed” in an instant, that might be more convincing it were not a natural phenomenon…

Are you suggesting that miracles need to be more showy? Maybe God can send balloons and a get well soon card next time?

Edit: i’m trying to be more charitable, so God bless!

 

[Mijoy2]

Are you suggesting that miracles need to be more showy? Maybe God can send balloons and a get well soon card next time?

Edit: i’m trying to be more charitable, so God bless!

Nope.

I don’t think I came close to suggesting that. I think you rad that into what I suggested.
What I did suggest is that a miracle such as this one can be logically perceived as on the fringe of having a natural occurance. To think this would not be unreasonable.

 

[SpeakInSilence]

Nope.

I don’t think I came close to suggesting that. I think you rad that into what I suggested.
What I did suggest is that a miracle such as this one can be logically perceived as on the fringe of having a natural occurance. To think this would not be unreasonable.

I was only being facetious, I apologize if you took offensive.

How I see it is that the Vatican did an investigation, and though I know modern medicine has done things of this nature, and to great success, I’d like to believe this was legitimate.

Sometimes miracles happen in the littlest ways, and sometimes in large ways.

 

[missmorgan389]

So, who are the “Physicians [who] told her family that even if she survived emergency surgery, she’d spend the rest of her life in a vegetative state”. What was the basis of this prognosis? Exactly when was it given? Are there records? If so, have they been published? Why do all these miracles stories include unnamed doctors expressing hopelessness, but treating the patient anywhere, and then declaring the cure a miracle? Might it not, in this case, have been related to the emergency surgery?

Wasn’t it a miracle that someone was there to save her life in the first place? Wasn’t it a miracle that someone was nearby who found her on the ground after she fell off her bicycle?

You think of a miracle as something spectacular, that needs to have evidence.

I think of a miracle as a new day. Seeing someone who graciously lets them cut ahead in line at the supermarket, who holds the door open for someone else.

 

[Hokomai]

Wasn’t it a miracle that someone was there to save her life in the first place? Wasn’t it a miracle that someone was nearby who found her on the ground after she fell off her bicycle?

You think of a miracle as something spectacular, that needs to have evidence.

I think of a miracle as a new day. Seeing someone who graciously lets them cut ahead in line at the supermarket, who holds the door open for someone else.

The changes the meaning of ‘miracle’ to ‘people finding themselves with an opportunity to do good, and taking it’. I like it. I wish we could all agree on it, without the need to promote unimpressive ‘cures’ as special interventions in the material order by god(s).

 

[Mijoy2]

I was only being facetious, I apologize if you took offensive.

How I see it is that the Vatican did an investigation, and though I know modern medicine has done things of this nature, and to great success, I’d like to believe this was legitimate.

Sometimes miracles happen in the littlest ways, and sometimes in large ways.

No offense taken.

God knows how badly I want to believe in such miracles along with other “Catholic” miracles that are perhaps more evident in God’s hand being behind them.

Sigmatas (Esp. Padre Pio),
Shroud or Turin
Tilma
Dancing of the Sun

So much more. The sceptic in me floats thru the soup to the top of the bowl. Again (perhaps the engineeer in me) once again I think statistically. If any one of these are miraculous then it raises the odds that more are.

I guess I am one of those people who will need to wake up one day to find that Mt Everest has been moved to Florida for my nagging doubts to fade.

 

[St_Francis]

Wasn’t it a miracle that someone was there to save her life in the first place? Wasn’t it a miracle that someone was nearby who found her on the ground after she fell off her bicycle?

You think of a miracle as something spectacular, that needs to have evidence.

I think of a miracle as a new day. Seeing someone who graciously lets them cut ahead in line at the supermarket, who holds the door open for someone else.

On an everyday basis, yes, some people call those miracles, as if all gifts from God were miracles.

But in the technical sense, as when we say that the Church has validated a miracle, no. The type of miracle we are talking about here is an event which has no natural explanation and is attributed to God’s action.

 

[St_Francis]

No offense taken.

God knows how badly I want to believe in such miracles along with other “Catholic” miracles that are perhaps more evident in God’s hand being behind them.

Sigmatas (Esp. Padre Pio),
Shroud or Turin
Tilma
Dancing of the Sun

So much more. The sceptic in me floats thru the soup to the top of the bowl. Again (perhaps the engineeer in me) once again I think statistically. If any one of these are miraculous then it raises the odds that more are.

I guess I am one of those people who will need to wake up one day to find that Mt Everest has been moved to Florida for my nagging doubts to fade.

The changes the meaning of ‘miracle’ to ‘people finding themselves with an opportunity to do good, and taking it’. I like it. I wish we could all agree on it, without the need to promote unimpressive ‘cures’ as special interventions in the material order by god(s).

Here is a list and brief description of the miraculous cures at Lourdes validated by the Church after thorough investigation.

Here is how the international medical committee of Lourdes briefly describes the criteria for consideration: The files of the “unexpected cures” are studies to complete the authentication inquiry which consists of a comparative study of the medical documents before and after the cure. ** This is to ensure that there was an indisputable change from a precise medical diagnosis of a known illness to a situation of restored health. They will also look to see if this cure shows signs of being completely out of character with the development of this illness. ** The opinion of a large number of professional specialists will be sought by a member of the CMIL before the file is presented to a gathering of the CMIL. In the end, the CMIL will classify the cure as no follow-up or they will validate this cure which they feel has been “thoroughly discussed and confirmed”

Here is a scientist, Dr. Ricardo Castanon Gomez, discussing the results of his investigations into a Eucharistic Miracle. It’s video of about 10 minutes–he is speaking Spanish and there are English subtitles. Here is a short blog post or article discussing some of the same topics and mentioning this scientist (in English)

(Here is the first of a series of Youtube videos by the same man, but they are all in Spanish. Altho he speaks slowly and clearly, and many of the words he uses are similar to English words, I don’t know how well a non-Spanish-speaker could follow them. <<<Those I have seen; this one I haven’t seen but might be the same one, but with subtitles.)

 

[St_Francis]

I wish people would stop quoting this 13th-century error in thinking at me. On what possible basis can it be held that people without faith cannot accept an explanation?

Sorry if this looks familiar

Hi Hokomai,
…I read this in a talk by the Pope, so I thought I would pass it along: *

Seeing that many of His disciples were leaving, Jesus addressed the Apostles, saying: “Will you also go away?” (Jn 6:67). As in other cases, it is Peter who replied on behalf of the Twelve: “Lord, to whom shall we go? - and we too can reflect: to whom shall we go? - You have the words of eternal life and we have believed and know that You are the Holy One of God" (Jn 6:68-69).

On this passage we have a beautiful commentary of St. Augustine, who says in one of his homilies on John 6:

“Do you see how Peter, by the grace of God, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, has understood? Why did he understand? Because he believed. You have the words of eternal life. You give us eternal life by offering your risen body and your blood, your very self. And we have believed and understood.

"He does not say we have understood and then we believed, but we believed and then we understood. We have believed in order to be able to understand; if, in fact, we wanted to understand before believing, we would not be able either to understand or to believe*. What have we believed and what have we understood? That You are the Christ, the Son of God, that is, that You are that very eternal life, and that You give in Your flesh and blood only that which You are”

Why would we have to believe before we can understand? I would propose that it is because we cannot understand without the grace of God helping us in our understanding. The fishermen were humble men, unlike the kings or the leaders of the Temple. They looked at what was happening, and they didn’t understand, but they *knew *Christ, they trusted Him and believed in Him, and so, *through the grace of God, *understanding was given to them.

So I speculate that you and others like you want to understand on your own, but you are unable to understand on your own because you are merely human–this understanding is beyond our capabilities as humans. We can only understand with God’s help, and so we must take that leap of faith so that we can receive His help.

 

[Hokomai]

Here is a list and brief description of the miraculous cures at Lourdes validated by the Church after thorough investigation.

Here is how the international medical committee of Lourdes briefly describes the criteria for consideration: *The files of the “unexpected cures” are studies to complete the authentication inquiry which consists of a comparative study of the medical documents before and after the cure. *** This is to ensure that there was an indisputable change from a precise medical diagnosis of a known illness to a situation of restored health. They will also look to see if this cure shows signs of being completely out of character with the development of this illness. ** The opinion of a large number of professional specialists will be sought by a member of the CMIL before the file is presented to a gathering of the CMIL. In the end, the CMIL will classify the cure as no follow-up or they will validate this cure which they feel has been “thoroughly discussed and confirmed”

Here is a scientist, Dr. Ricardo Castanon Gomez, discussing the results of his investigations into a Eucharistic Miracle. It’s video of about 10 minutes–he is speaking Spanish and there are English subtitles. Here is a short blog post or article discussing some of the same topics and mentioning this scientist (in English)

(Here is the first of a series of Youtube videos by the same man, but they are all in Spanish. Altho he speaks slowly and clearly, and many of the words he uses are similar to English words, I don’t know how well a non-Spanish-speaker could follow them. <<<Those I have seen; this one I haven’t seen but might be the same one, but with subtitles.)

Where does the International Medical Committee of Lourdes present its findings and document them in the normal scientific way, for peer review? Or does it not?

 

[Hokomai]

So I speculate that you and others like you want to understand on your own, but you are unable to understand on your own because you are merely human–this understanding is beyond our capabilities as humans. We can only understand with God’s help, and so we must take that leap of faith so that we can receive His help.

So there are two sorts of understanding: one, that we humans can do unaided and two, that we can do assisted by God.

Am I right in thinking that this understanding - that there are two sorts of understanding, is one of the second sort? And if so, is not the reasoning here entirely circular: “I understand in a manner that I can only do with God’s help that there is a sort of understanding that can only be done with God’s help”?

And while I appreciate that this has meaning for you, as faith allows you to leap on the thought-go-round at any point, can you accept that it is completely without meaning to me? Can you also accept that I cannot see the difference between this leap of faith and that of a Muslim, in the Koran as the direct word of God, or a Hindu in their personal reincarnation, or an animist in the essential life principle of a rock?