F
Faith1960
Guest
Let us know what they say.
- Status
F
Faith1960
Guest
Ok, that makes sense.
G
graciew
Guest
Well,we should start by Adoration,don’t you think so?
Maybe this thread is meant to lead us both to be obedient to our Church and patient…who knows? :curtsey:
F
Faith1960
Guest
I go to Adoration, but haven’t been there in awhile. My church has it on Tuesdays, but a nearby parish has nearly perpetual Adoration. I also like visiting a chapel at a nuns monastery nearby. They don’t have Adoration ( or maybe they do and I don’t know about it) but I enjoy sitting there in the quiet, lighting a candle and praying before their tabernacle.
G
graciew
Guest
Me too, there is something so much loving when thinking wherever we are on earth we are kneeling or sitting in front of Jesus,all adorers at the same time…I’ve always found that very powerful,or wow! so beyond us to understand,you know.
I had my fixed hour for years,since I moved back,I do not.
My parishes do have Perpetual Adoration. I believe it started about 10,12 years ago.
Yes, I feel much peace when I am there in the quiet,praying or just being there in silence in His presence.
F
Faith1960
Guest
I agree.
M
Megan7
Guest
Thank you so much Graciew
God bless you.
G
graciew
Guest
For nothing…we are a family,aren’t we?Thank you so much Graciew
God bless you too,Megan!
J
josh987654321
Guest
Thank you graciew
I can’t wait to hear what information you find at the talk. Thanks again graciew and i’ll be eagerly waiting.
God Bless
Thank you for reading
Josh
O
otjm
Guest
And St Thomas is known to have been wrong about one or two things… He may be the greatest theologian of the Church, but he was just that - a theologian, not the Magisterium. If the flesh is not miraculously the flesh of Christ, then whose flesh is it? Human flesh does not exist, apart from a human; to say otherwise is an oxymoron.
J
johnmann
Guest
St. Thomas Aquinas makes a lot of sense here. It’s possible that it isn’t Jesus’ DNA because God can give the Eucharist the appearance of anything including someone else’s flesh. Remember, it’s not the appearance/accidents that make it the body of Christ. A piece of flesh could have the substance of the body of Christ and the accidents of say… your own flesh!
G
graciew
Guest
You are welcome , Josh !Thank you graciew
I can’t wait to hear what information you find at the talk. Thanks again graciew and i’ll be eagerly waiting.
God Bless
Thank you for reading
Josh
O
otjm
Guest
Sure. Of course. That is why, when a miracle such as this happens, when the Host is enfleshed, people worship it - because it is someone else’s flesh.
NOT
St Thomas does not make sense. God doesn’t play “cute” and make the Eucharist - the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of His beloved Son into someone else’s flesh.
J
johnmann
Guest
According to that logic, Catholics worship bread and wine and that’s okay.
Instead, he made it into bread and wine which is supposed to be less cute?
O
otjm
Guest
Then you don’t know logic.
I don’t know what you are trying to prove, but you have failed. It might behoove you to study logic, and a smattering of theology. Have a good day - this conversation is over.
C
cornbread_r2
Guest
Has the Magisterium held that he was wrong about extraordinary Eucharistic miracles?
I see no reason why God couldn’t create as much disassociated human tissue and blood as he wished.
It seems that the easiest way to settle the question would be to compare the DNA profiles from the various alleged approved miracles to see if they match up. That wouldn’t prove that the flesh and blood of any of the samples was that of Jesus or even that they all weren’t miraculously created (as per TA), but if any sample differed, we could be sure that they all couldn’t be from Jesus. I also think that the odds that the church would ever permit such a comparison is slim to none.
J
josh987654321
Guest
I believe the short answer is no.
I hope you don’t mind if I share with you what I have learned about this Eucharistic Miracle that may help you.
Id first like to start by saying that I’m quoting a little bit of the following information out of the book ‘Unseen - New Evidence’ by Ron Tesoriero which explains what happened and what they did.
http://s15.postimg.org/mzvgbd747/unseen.jpg
Unseen - New Evidence
In Buenos Aires in 1999, Pope Francis, then known as Archbishop Jorge Bergoglio, sought a scientific investigation into something very unusual. A Communion Host appeared to have inexplicably changed to what looked like flesh and blood. First published in “Reason to Believe” in 2007, and then presented to Pope Benedict XVI and geneticist Dr. Francis Collins, Director of the Human Genome Project in 2009, the startling scientific evidence inspired Ron Tesoriero, an Australian lawyer and documentary film producer, and co-author Lee Han, to follow where the evidence led. And where it led is remarkable. This new book, “UNSEEN – New Evidence” presents not only a convincing basis for the belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist but is the most serious scientific challenge yet to contemporary thinking on the origin of life in the universe.
You can purchase it here - loveandmercy.org/english-books/ simply scroll down, you should come across it.
The following is an extract from the book ‘Unseen - New Evidence by Ron Tesorero’
http://s27.postimg.org/ejw8d8z83/IMG.jpg
http://s8.postimg.org/nus5ky0md/IMG_0001.jpg
IT CAN’T BE TRUE
The first and most natural response to the event described (Eucharistic Miracle of Argentina) is disbelief. How can bread become heart? Surely someone intent on creating a hoax or faking a miracle engineered the whole deception.
The witnesses to the first days of this unfolding process were not unaware of possible future allegations of tampering with the contents of the bowl. Padre Alejandro Pezet and Emma Fernandez insisted that the original tabernacle had been kept locked and no one else other than the ministers of communion and the priests of the parish had access to its contents or to the key. Furthermore they say that on the 26th of August, a week after the host was originally put in the tabernacle, the bowl with its contents was transferred to another separate private tabernacle in the presbytery and locked. This time only the parish priests had access to the key. Pezet speculated that, “Even if someone could have put something in the bowl before the 26th August without me knowing, you have to ask how that person could gain access to a locked tabernacle in another place and make it change it’s characteristics to look like what you see in the photo on 6th September 1996.”
The assurance the Argentine priests have in the security provided by the tabernacle arises from a custom with centuries of history. A tabernacle in a Catholic Church has always been a solid container, like an ornamental safe or locker, often built into an altar or a wall. Traditionally constructed of an inviolable material (often metal), it is never transparent and, above all, always capable of being securely locked. Its function is the reservation of communion hosts. Access to it is strictly limited to priests and to the few lay ministers directly involved in celebration of the Mass. Pezet drew attention to the fact that an obvious process of change was evident even after it was locked in a second tabernacle to which only two priests had access. To suspect either of them in manufacturing a hoax becomes absurd in light of the scientific report. The questions to be considered before making any hypothetical allegation of deceit involve far more than simply asking how someone could have placed human heart tissue in a locked tabernacle.
Please continue to next post -
J
josh987654321
Guest
Dr Zugibe, the heart specialist, asserts that the tissue was a snapshot of active human cell behaviour. It was evidence of life, not death. And yet what the professor is describing is tissue on a slide, prepared and fixed five years earlier after having been in water for more than three years. This means that until the tissue was fixed as a slide, it must have remained as living tissue. Why does Professor Zugibe say it was alive? Because white blood cells, particularly the clearly visible, intact, polymorphonuclear leukocytes, cannot survive outside of a body for more than a few minutes before disintegrating. Indeed the entire life span of white blood cells is a short cycle of days even when in a living body when they are actively addressing trauma in a tissue.
Dr Zugibe’s assessment of the good state of preservation of the white blood cells and the muscle tissue was what might have been expected if they had been placed in a preservative like formalin. But the liquid substance in which the material sampled had been kept was analysed by Dr Thomas Loy of Queensland University on 30 August 2001 following which he reported, “No organic odour was detected that might be associated with histological fixing chemicals (commonly, alcohol, xylene, formaldehyde). The refractive index of the fluid was compared with water and known standards and determined to be essentially that of water.”
Biology textbooks will tell you that all tissue, but particularly white blood cells, dissolves and disintegrates readily when placed in water. Osmotic pressure on cells placed in distilled water is higher than tap water and more detrimental to their longevity. Dr Zugibe confirms “it would be impossible for the white blood cells to be present in the sample if the sample had been kept in water” and that, “if this tissue had been placed in water it would normally have broken down within one week.” Yet what he sees in his microscope is heart tissue with white blood cells that was in water for more than three years and yet still presented as vital. Dr Zugibe’s assessment of the white blood cells accords with textbook analysis of what occurs to blood cells if left in distilled water. By osmosis water moves into the cells which then swell and explode, undergoing cell lysis, meaning cell destruction, which essentially means they, or even remnants of what once were cells, would be very difficult to find under a microscope.
Zugibe not only identifies tissue, he examines it forensically to provide an historical account, a picture of what recently transpired in the heart from which the tissue is only an extract. He provides a timeframe. He interprets what he sees and provides and educated evaluation of what happened in the life of that ‘person’. This ‘person’ experienced cardiac trauma two or three days earlier. Dr Zugibe could date the event that compromised the blood supply to the heart by the presentation of the tissue itself and by the process of immune response underway.
Not only was the person ‘alive at the time the sample was taken’ but this person had a particular medical history because this particular heat tissue revealed, 'degenerative changes consistent with a recent myocardial infraction of a few days duration…due to an obstruction of a coronary artery that supplies nutrients and oxygen to an area of heart muscle. This obstruction may be the result of atherosclerosis or a coronary thrombosis or," said Dr Zugibe, “a severe blow to the chest over the heart.”
Clearly questions about the phenomenon are more complicated than simply asking how someone could have had access to a locked tabernacle and manipulated a piece of bread so that it transformed into what appears to be human tissue. Had someone say a surgeon or a murderer, sliced off a small piece of heart tissue from the left ventricle in the vicinity of the valve from a living person and then dropped it into the bowl of water with the wafer, how could he have then engineered it to be progressively embedded in the host so that it was of one substance with the wafer? How could he have ensured it’s continuing transformation whilst securely locked away? How could he have defied and altered the natural rates of decomposition for white blood cells and kept the white blood cells alive for longer then a few minutes? Indeed how could he have defied the physical laws of entropy and decay and kept the white cells alive for three years in water, cells which under normal circumstances would not last for more than a few minutes? How would he have engineered his hoax so that it was it was identified as laboratory analysis as** clearly containing human DNA yet stubbornly resistant to yielding his ‘victim’s’ DNA profile?** How would he have maintained an ongoing process of tissue activity (inflammation) in a disembodied piece of heart whilst transporting it from a theoretical corpse/murder victim to the glass bowl of the tabernacle? How could he have that process of life continue after placing the tissue in water? And since no human could survive having a piece of his heart removed one has to ask where the remainder of the heart is? And morbidly, where is the body?
Please continue to next post -
Dr Zugibe’s assessment of the good state of preservation of the white blood cells and the muscle tissue was what might have been expected if they had been placed in a preservative like formalin. But the liquid substance in which the material sampled had been kept was analysed by Dr Thomas Loy of Queensland University on 30 August 2001 following which he reported, “No organic odour was detected that might be associated with histological fixing chemicals (commonly, alcohol, xylene, formaldehyde). The refractive index of the fluid was compared with water and known standards and determined to be essentially that of water.”
Biology textbooks will tell you that all tissue, but particularly white blood cells, dissolves and disintegrates readily when placed in water. Osmotic pressure on cells placed in distilled water is higher than tap water and more detrimental to their longevity. Dr Zugibe confirms “it would be impossible for the white blood cells to be present in the sample if the sample had been kept in water” and that, “if this tissue had been placed in water it would normally have broken down within one week.” Yet what he sees in his microscope is heart tissue with white blood cells that was in water for more than three years and yet still presented as vital. Dr Zugibe’s assessment of the white blood cells accords with textbook analysis of what occurs to blood cells if left in distilled water. By osmosis water moves into the cells which then swell and explode, undergoing cell lysis, meaning cell destruction, which essentially means they, or even remnants of what once were cells, would be very difficult to find under a microscope.
Zugibe not only identifies tissue, he examines it forensically to provide an historical account, a picture of what recently transpired in the heart from which the tissue is only an extract. He provides a timeframe. He interprets what he sees and provides and educated evaluation of what happened in the life of that ‘person’. This ‘person’ experienced cardiac trauma two or three days earlier. Dr Zugibe could date the event that compromised the blood supply to the heart by the presentation of the tissue itself and by the process of immune response underway.
Not only was the person ‘alive at the time the sample was taken’ but this person had a particular medical history because this particular heat tissue revealed, 'degenerative changes consistent with a recent myocardial infraction of a few days duration…due to an obstruction of a coronary artery that supplies nutrients and oxygen to an area of heart muscle. This obstruction may be the result of atherosclerosis or a coronary thrombosis or," said Dr Zugibe, “a severe blow to the chest over the heart.”
Clearly questions about the phenomenon are more complicated than simply asking how someone could have had access to a locked tabernacle and manipulated a piece of bread so that it transformed into what appears to be human tissue. Had someone say a surgeon or a murderer, sliced off a small piece of heart tissue from the left ventricle in the vicinity of the valve from a living person and then dropped it into the bowl of water with the wafer, how could he have then engineered it to be progressively embedded in the host so that it was of one substance with the wafer? How could he have ensured it’s continuing transformation whilst securely locked away? How could he have defied and altered the natural rates of decomposition for white blood cells and kept the white blood cells alive for longer then a few minutes? Indeed how could he have defied the physical laws of entropy and decay and kept the white cells alive for three years in water, cells which under normal circumstances would not last for more than a few minutes? How would he have engineered his hoax so that it was it was identified as laboratory analysis as** clearly containing human DNA yet stubbornly resistant to yielding his ‘victim’s’ DNA profile?** How would he have maintained an ongoing process of tissue activity (inflammation) in a disembodied piece of heart whilst transporting it from a theoretical corpse/murder victim to the glass bowl of the tabernacle? How could he have that process of life continue after placing the tissue in water? And since no human could survive having a piece of his heart removed one has to ask where the remainder of the heart is? And morbidly, where is the body?
Please continue to next post -
J
josh987654321
Guest
The substance which was analysed by scientists had the appearance of human heart muscle tissue and the presence of human DNA. It was the same substance which appeared spontaneously from a wheaten host. It is reasonable to conclude from evidence given by the Argentine witnesses that it was the same communion host that was put in the glass bowl with tap water on 18 August 1996, the communion host and nothing else. The likelihood of tampering with the contents of the bowl or the host before the transformation was witnessed is implausible given the subsequent scientific evaluation of the transformed material. The heart tissue revealed a recent history of trauma and an immune response to that trauma in the form of white blood cells. These were intact and had nuclei. The white blood cells were living at the same time the sample was taken. The survival of the white blood cells and the preservation of the tissue after having been placed in water for over three years is scientifically inexplicable.
If the evidence of witnesses and the results of the scientific investigation are accepted, what appears to have occurred is that life has emerged from an inanimate piece of bread. Living cells, each one as formidably complex as contemporary biology teaches, have come from matter which is not alive. Life has come from non-life.
This event is of immense significance to science in general and to origin of life science in particular. But that’s not all. The momentous implications of the astonishing transformation have been substantially raised. The status of the Argentina phenomenon is now supported by new evidence. The same thing has happened again. The case is not unique. (Talking about The Eucharistic Miracle in Poland, Sokolka, October 12, 2008 in the next chapter of the book).
http://s29.postimg.org/dcx344afb/IMGDNA.jpg
http://s27.postimg.org/iz44sfuj7/IMG_0002.jpg
And for more information regarding this Eucharistic Miracle, please go to the following - acs-cpanel2.acsinternet.com.au/~unseen/
Dr. Frederick Zugibe
Dr. Robert Lawrence
This is all I know so far, I hope this has helped you.
God Bless
Thank you for reading
Josh
If the evidence of witnesses and the results of the scientific investigation are accepted, what appears to have occurred is that life has emerged from an inanimate piece of bread. Living cells, each one as formidably complex as contemporary biology teaches, have come from matter which is not alive. Life has come from non-life.
This event is of immense significance to science in general and to origin of life science in particular. But that’s not all. The momentous implications of the astonishing transformation have been substantially raised. The status of the Argentina phenomenon is now supported by new evidence. The same thing has happened again. The case is not unique. (Talking about The Eucharistic Miracle in Poland, Sokolka, October 12, 2008 in the next chapter of the book).
http://s29.postimg.org/dcx344afb/IMGDNA.jpg
http://s27.postimg.org/iz44sfuj7/IMG_0002.jpg
And for more information regarding this Eucharistic Miracle, please go to the following - acs-cpanel2.acsinternet.com.au/~unseen/
Dr. Frederick Zugibe
Dr. Robert Lawrence
This is all I know so far, I hope this has helped you.
God Bless
Thank you for reading
Josh
R
robertmidwest
Guest
Here are a couple of interesting articles that might relate to this thread.
recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140808/A_NEWS/408080314/-1/rss02
recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20111126/A_NEWS/111260316/-1/rss06
I did a quick Google search using the name off the label in the letter by Dr. Zugibe and these articles came up
All a matter of public record.
recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140808/A_NEWS/408080314/-1/rss02
recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20111126/A_NEWS/111260316/-1/rss06
I did a quick Google search using the name off the label in the letter by Dr. Zugibe and these articles came up
All a matter of public record.
- Status