Non-Catholic view of Apparitions, Incorruptibles, Miraculous Healings, etc.

[lakotak]

In the book “Reason To Believe” by Ron Tesoreiro.

Thank you, I will check this out. I am very interested.

 

[guanophore]

We see enough of the Devil in this world. Let’s hope for more appearances of the Blessed Virgin.

Jon

Sometimes you are so “Catholic” I think it might make many in your communitys’ hair stand on end!

 

[SteveVH]

I was raised evangelical Protestant and converted to Catholicism in 2004.

I hope these words don’t seem too harsh or offensive to Catholics, but I’m only trying to answer your question. I hope that my answer will help Catholics when they are talking to others about the miracles.

In the evangelical Protestant churches that I was part of , we said that these “miracles” do not call attention to Jesus Christ, but to human beings, Mary and the saints. This proved to us that the miracles were not from God.

Catholics would and should argue that these miracles occur in order to point people to Jesus, not to humans. But that’s not what is reported or talked about. What the evangelical Protestants hear and see in the media is “An apparition of the Virgin Mary appeared…” or “A miraculous preservation of a French nun…”

No mention of Jesus Christ.

Do you understand what I am saying?

Even in your opening post, there is no mention of Jesus Christ. You bring up the miracles of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and Fatima, and various saints, and you point out that these “prove” the validity of the Catholic Church. But you do not mention that these miracles occur in order to point people to Jesus!

Of course, we Catholics know and understand that the miracles are not meant to glorify Mary or the saints, and that the results of these miracles is belief in Jesus as Savior and Lord. But Protestants do NOT know and understand this! They know only what they read and see, and what they read and see is all about Mary and other humans, not about Jesus.

I hope I am making this clear and understandable. I am speaking the truth, at least when it comes to evangelical Protestantism.

My suggestion is that when talking or writing about these miracles to evangelical Protestants, always ALWAYS make sure to understate the actual miracles and instead, emphasize the effects of the miracles, namely that people repent of their sins and come to a saving faith in Jesus Christ. Make sure that the evangelical Protestant knows that Jesus Christ receives all the honor and glory for this miracle, not the Virgin Mary or any human being.

Unfortunately, most of the time, an evangelical Protestant will not hear about these miracles from a Catholic who can explain how they glorify Jesus, but they hear about the miracles from the secular media, which distorts what actually happened and fails to explain why it happened.

Again, I do not mean to be offensive, but only say these words so that you will know and understand the minds of the evangelical Protestants.

There is much truth in what you have said. The purpose of this thread was not to discuss a particular miracle and various ways it may or may not point to Christ. That would be an interesting and worthwhile thread but my question has to do with how some of these miracles just simply escape the larger population’s attention or are just ignored. As far as miracles pointing to Christ, I believe all miracles point to Christ in one way or another.

 

[JonNC]

Sometimes you are so “Catholic” I think it might make many in your communitys’ hair stand on end!

LOL. I think there are some in my community who have not read the confessions on her, much less Luther and Chemnitz.

Chemnitz with his Rosary beads.
Jon

 

[andrewstx]

There was a little girl who was born without pupils. Her mother took her to see St. Padre Pio. On the train ride there, as her mother was praying, the little girl could suddenly see. She was checked by doctors and no one could explain how she could see without any pupils. She never had pupils her entire life but could see perfeclty. She died only about 20 or so years ago but was a walking testimony. Sorry, I just don’t think events like this can ever be considered “old fashioned”. Maybe miracles are not believed by those who are afraid they may have to change their lives if they found it were true.

I think that is very much the case in RE to him. He was raised Baptist but with new-age superstitous influences. He converted to the church and became Benedictine, but that did not last either. What did stick was the new age superstition and he has become Episcopal now, they let him beleive as he wishes for the most part.

 

[andrewstx]

I think that is very much the case in RE to him. He was raised Baptist but with new-age superstitous influences. He converted to the church and became Benedictine, but that did not last either. What did stick was the new age superstition and he has become Episcopal now, they let him beleive as he wishes for the most part.

Come to think of it I think it may be the Irish in him. He is very proud of his Irish roots. And the Irish in Ireland are very into little people, banshees and the like.

 

[SteveVH]

Come to think of it I think it may be the Irish in him. He is very proud of his Irish roots. And the Irish in Ireland are very into little people, banshees and the like.

Makes complete sense. :irish3:

 

[Radical]

Just got through reading an incredible book, the author of which investigated various miraculous events; Eucharistic miracles, bleeding statues, Our Lady of Guadalupe and others. My purpose here is not to dwell on the book. It just struck me that Catholic history is absolutely bursting at the seams with miraculous events which are signs of God’s presence and activity within the Catholic Church.

These are events that have been investigated thoroughly and found beyond explanation in the natural world.

actually, I don’t think that there is a single claimed miracle that has been validated scientifically…as a rule the investigations are anything but scientific and thorough…but please, if I am wrong, post the peer-reviewed scientific paper that concludes that the Catholic claim to a miraculous event is good

Some, such as the Miracle at Fatima, were witnessed by over 70,000 people.

…and reports on that alleged miracle by those who aren’t determined to ratify the claim are less than enthusiatic WRT a miraculous event

Modern science has studied the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe and determined that it is not a painting, no pigment is present in the fiber.

I call fudge and ask you to post the scientific study

In fact the image hovers 0.032 mm above the fiber.

you have got to be kidding…have you given a thought to what Venerators would have done with this phenomenon if it was actually true? High def high magnitude videos would have flooded the internet and would have been featured on 60 minutes

The numbers of documented miraculous healings at Lourdes is famous.

any that are properly documented?

We have saints who’s bodies have never decomposed, after hundreds of years.

what are you claiming exactly?..half miracles perhaps?..the bodies are deteriorating, just slowly

My question is simply; what do non-Catholics think about all of this?

that the claims are bogus

Does it influence your faith in any way?

it could. As I have said elsewhere, I am highly skeptical…but here is something all you faithful adherents could do for us skeptics:

1. pick the five Eucharistics miracles that enjoy the greatest confidence of Catholics;
2. run DNA tests on the flesh and blood samples from those five miracles;
3. the results should either:

a) prove to the rest of us that all the DNA samples came from a single person, a male semite to be precise; or

b) prove that the adherents are a gullible and mistaken lot (when it comes to Eucharistic miracles)

The CC didn’t seem to have a problem with having the shroud tested, so there shouldn’t be any issue wrt the principle of having alleged miracles tested scientifically

Catholics seem to be quite pleased to refer to the scientific testing that was done on some of the Eucharistic miracle samples, so there shouldn’t be an issue wrt such testing being improper as it relates to such samples (I believe the official position is that the samples are not substantially the body of Christ, but are the accidents only of such body).

There are a host of Eucharistic miracles endorsed by the Vatican ( see its exhibit ) so there should be no shortage of samples.

This could be the clincher! How could one possibly explain away a result that showed that these samples all shared the same DNA? I guess some (frothing-at-the-mouth) anti-Catholics could insist that it was Satan’s miracle, but I have to think that if the testing was controlled (such that a rigged conspirarcy could be ruled out) most Evangelicals (who deny a real bodily presence) would have to admit that such a result would pretty well prove the Catholics right. Agnostics, atheists and other non-Christians would be hard pressed to deny Catholicism (and Orthodoxy et al) their due. It could be a wonderful tool to convince people of the truth…if these miracles are legitimate.

Does it say anything about the Catholic Church in your view?

it says more about the person making the claim…when you make a claim such as: " the image hovers 0.032 mm above the fiber" …you lose all credibility

I realize that miracles happen outside of the Catholic Church as well, but not even close in number and magnitude to those documented by the Catholic Church.

actually, I believe that charismatic, non-catholic Christians claim far more miracles than do Catholics…and their documentation is about on par.

 

[Rawb]

Someone once told me something that has always rung very true: “For a non-believer there is no evidence ever good enough to prove a miracle. For a believer everything is a miracle.”

 

[Anna_Scott]

Just got through reading an incredible book, the author of which investigated various miraculous events; Eucharistic miracles, bleeding statues, Our Lady of Guadalupe and others. My purpose here is not to dwell on the book. It just struck me that Catholic history is absolutely bursting at the seams with miraculous events which are signs of God’s presence and activity within the Catholic Church.

These are events that have been investigated thoroughly and found beyond explanation in the natural world. Some, such as the Miracle at Fatima, were witnessed by over 70,000 people. Modern science has studied the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe and determined that it is not a painting, no pigment is present in the fiber. In fact the image hovers 0.032 mm above the fiber. The numbers of documented miraculous healings at Lourdes is famous. We have saints who’s bodies have never decomposed, after hundreds of years.

My question is simply; what do non-Catholics think about all of this? Does it influence your faith in any way? Does it say anything about the Catholic Church in your view? Do you think it is all a bunch of bunk? I realize that miracles happen outside of the Catholic Church as well, but not even close in number and magnitude to those documented by the Catholic Church.

Thanks in advance.

Steve

Steve,
Excellent question.

The miracles do testify to the Holy Spirit working through the Catholic Church; but they are not enough to convince me that the Catholic Church is the one and only true Church.

Think of it this way, if the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to an Anglican or a group of Anglicans—or if a Eucharistic miracle happened in an Anglican Church; would that cause you to leave the Catholic Church and become Anglican? That’s the best way I know to explain my reaction to Catholic miracles.

I think the miracles that might be seen as a witness to the authority of the Catholic Church have a greater effect on non-Catholics, when they happen to non-Catholics.

I wrote this on a thread back in 2010. There is nothing sensational about this account, but it did affect my mom, my sister, and me; and caused us all to view the Catholic Church in a different light:

". . . .Many years ago, I visited St. Joseph’s Oratory in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I was with my mother and sister. This was a stop on our one-day bus tour of Montreal.

My mother was a very devout Christian, brought up in a Southern Baptist Church. As we walked through the candlelit hall leading to Frère André’s tomb, my Mom stopped to light a candle. I was really surprised. I could tell something was going on with her. After we left, she said she thought there really was something special about Brother André.’ She experienced a strong presence of the Holy Spirit. Keep in mind, my Mom was in no way “charismatic.” She really couldn’t quite put the experience into words. The experience did have a positive effect on her view of the Catholic Church.

Here I am nearly 30 years later, learning about the communion of the Saints; and I have this memory of my Mom’s experience on the site of Catholic pilgrimage and worship. There is something powerful about that.

Frère André was beatified in 1982. I think our trip to Montreal was around 1983 or 1984."

Having said all of that; I will say that I am particularly interested in the appearances of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and would like to read more about these miracles and the way in which they may point to the authority of the Catholic Church.

Peace and blessings,
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

. . . .What did stick was the new age superstition and he has become Episcopal now, they let him beleive as he wishes for the most part.

:tsktsk:

 

[SteveVH]

actually, I don’t think that there is a single claimed miracle that has been validated scientifically…as a rule the investigations are anything but scientific and thorough…but please, if I am wrong, post the peer-reviewed scientific paper that concludes that the Catholic claim to a miraculous event is good

…and reports on that alleged miracle by those who aren’t determined to ratify the claim are less than enthusiatic WRT a miraculous event

I call fudge and ask you to post the scientific study

you have got to be kidding…have you given a thought to what Venerators would have done with this phenomenon if it was actually true? High def high magnitude videos would have flooded the internet and would have been featured on 60 minutes

any that are properly documented?

what are you claiming exactly?..half miracles perhaps?..the bodies are deteriorating, just slowly

that the claims are bogus

it could. As I have said elsewhere, I am highly skeptical…but here is something all you faithful adherents could do for us skeptics:

1. pick the five Eucharistics miracles that enjoy the greatest confidence of Catholics;
2. run DNA tests on the flesh and blood samples from those five miracles;
3. the results should either:

a) prove to the rest of us that all the DNA samples came from a single person, a male semite to be precise; or

b) prove that the adherents are a gullible and mistaken lot (when it comes to Eucharistic miracles)

The CC didn’t seem to have a problem with having the shroud tested, so there shouldn’t be any issue wrt the principle of having alleged miracles tested scientifically

Catholics seem to be quite pleased to refer to the scientific testing that was done on some of the Eucharistic miracle samples, so there shouldn’t be an issue wrt such testing being improper as it relates to such samples (I believe the official position is that the samples are not substantially the body of Christ, but are the accidents only of such body).

There are a host of Eucharistic miracles endorsed by the Vatican ( see its exhibit ) so there should be no shortage of samples.

This could be the clincher! How could one possibly explain away a result that showed that these samples all shared the same DNA? I guess some (frothing-at-the-mouth) anti-Catholics could insist that it was Satan’s miracle, but I have to think that if the testing was controlled (such that a rigged conspirarcy could be ruled out) most Evangelicals (who deny a real bodily presence) would have to admit that such a result would pretty well prove the Catholics right. Agnostics, atheists and other non-Christians would be hard pressed to deny Catholicism (and Orthodoxy et al) their due. It could be a wonderful tool to convince people of the truth…if these miracles are legitimate.

it says more about the person making the claim…when you make a claim such as: " the image hovers 0.032 mm above the fiber" …you lose all credibility

actually, I believe that charismatic, non-catholic Christians claim far more miracles than do Catholics…and their documentation is about on par.

 

[SteveVH]

actually, I don’t think that there is a single claimed miracle that has been validated scientifically…as a rule the investigations are anything but scientific and thorough…but please, if I am wrong, post the peer-reviewed scientific paper that concludes that the Catholic claim to a miraculous event is good

Nothing could be further from the truth. All miracles officially accepted by the Church have been validated scientifically; that is, they cannot be explained by science. The Vatican even has an office called “Devil’s Advocate”. The entire purpose of this office is to disprove any miraculous claims. In doing so they use outside experts specifically to insure credibility in the process. The miracles at Lourdes have been verified by secular physicians and other experts. The Church is not interested in creating a hoax. Why do you think it takes hundreds of years, in most cases, for a saint to be canonized? Miracles are required in order to be certain that this person is in heaven. The Church moves extremely slow in making this discernement. My point is that the Church is not in the business of making up fairy tales. It is extremely difficult to have a purported miracle proclaimed valid by the Church and usually takes years of investigation.

I call fudge and ask you to post the scientific study

Here are a list of studies from Wiki. If you want more detail you should be able to get there with this information. There are other studies as well.

Studies conducted between 1751–2 and 1982

MC – in 1756 a prominent artist, Miguel Cabrera, published a report entitled “Maravilla Americana” containing the findings made by himself and six other painters in 1751 and 1752 from ocular and manual inspection.[23]
G – José Antonio Flores Gómez, an art restorer, discussed in a 2002 interview with the Mexican journal Proceso (magazine) certain technical issues relative to the tilma, on which he had worked in 1947 and 1973.[24]
PC – in 1979 Philip Callahan, biophysicist and USDA entomologist, specializing in Infrared imaging, took numerous infrared photographs of the front of the tilma. His findings, with photographs, were published in 1981.[25]
R – “Proceso” also published in 2002 an interview with José Sol Rosales, formerly director of the Center for the Conservation and Listing of Heritage Artifacts (Patrimonio Artístico Mueble) of the National Institute of Fine Arts (INBA) in México City. This interview was interspersed with extracts from a report R had written in 1982 of the findings he had made during his inspection of the tilma that year using raking and UV light, and – at low magnification – a stereo microscope of the type used for surgery.[26]
Summary conclusions (“contra” indicates a contrary finding)

(1) Support: The material of the support is soft to the touch (almost silken: MC; something like cotton: G) but to the eye it suggested a coarse weave of palm threads called “pita” or the rough fiber called “cotense” (MC), or a hemp and linen mixture (R); the traditional understanding is that it is ixtle, an agave fiber.
(2) Ground, or Primer: R asserted (MC and PC contra) by ocular examination that the tilma was primed, though with primer “applied irregularly.” R does not clarify whether his observed “irregular” application entails that majorly the entire tilma was primed, or just certain areas – such as those areas of the tilma extrinsic to the image – where PC agrees had later additions. MC, alternatively, observed that the image had soaked through to the reverse of the tilma.[27]
(3) Under-drawing: PC asserted there was no under-drawing.
(4) Brush-work: R suggested (PC contra) there was some visible brushwork on the original image, but at best in only one minute area of the image (“her eyes, including the irises, have outlines, apparently applied by a brush”).
(5) Condition of the surface layer: The three most recent inspections agree (i) that significant additions have been made to the image, some of which were subsequently removed, and (ii) that the original image has been abraded and re-touched in places. Some flaking is visible (mostly along the line of the vertical seam, or at passages considered to be later additions).
(6) Varnish: The tilma has never been varnished.
(7) Binding Medium: R provisionally identified the pigments and binding medium (distemper) as consistent with 16th c. methods of painting sargas (MC, PC contra for different reasons), but the color values and luminosity are exceptional.

Continued…

 

[SteveVH]

Continued…

you have got to be kidding…have you given a thought to what Venerators would have done with this phenomenon if it was actually true? High def high magnitude videos would have flooded the internet and would have been featured on 60minutes

Yes, you would think so, but that is exactly why I started this thread. There are many miraculous events, unexplainable by science, and yet they are largely ignored.

any that are properly documented?

They have all been properly documented or they would not be accepted as miracles. You are free to do a search. I’m sure you’ll find two sides of the issue and again, make up your own mind, but based on the true evidence.

what are you claiming exactly?..half miracles perhaps?..the bodies are deteriorating, just slowly

How do you know they are deteriorating slowly? What is your source? Bodies don’t just slowly deteriorate over several hundred years

that the claims are bogus

I would never have guessed.

it could. As I have said elsewhere, I am highly skeptical…but here is something all you faithful adherents could do for us skeptics:

1. pick the five Eucharistics miracles that enjoy the greatest confidence of Catholics;
2. run DNA tests on the flesh and blood samples from those five miracles;
3. the results should either:

a) prove to the rest of us that all the DNA samples came from a single person, a male semite to be precise; or

b) prove that the adherents are a gullible and mistaken lot (when it comes to Eucharistic miracles)

The CC didn’t seem to have a problem with having the shroud tested, so there shouldn’t be any issue wrt the principle of having alleged miracles tested scientifically

Catholics seem to be quite pleased to refer to the scientific testing that was done on some of the Eucharistic miracle samples, so there shouldn’t be an issue wrt such testing being improper as it relates to such samples (I believe the official position is that the samples are not substantially the body of Christ, but are the accidents only of such body).

There are a host of Eucharistic miracles endorsed by the Vatican ( see its exhibit ) so there should be no shortage of samples.

This could be the clincher! How could one possibly explain away a result that showed that these samples all shared the same DNA? I guess some (frothing-at-the-mouth) anti-Catholics could insist that it was Satan’s miracle, but I have to think that if the testing was controlled (such that a rigged conspirarcy could be ruled out) most Evangelicals (who deny a real bodily presence) would have to admit that such a result would pretty well prove the Catholics right. Agnostics, atheists and other non-Christians would be hard pressed to deny Catholicism (and Orthodoxy et al) their due. It could be a wonderful tool to convince people of the truth…if these miracles are legitimate.

What I know is that the studies that have been done are consistent in that the flesh is actually cardiac tissue which contains arterioles, veins, and nerve fibers. The blood type in all approved Eucharistic miracles is type AB, very common in mideastern men and uncommon elsewhere. But you know, as well as I, that no evidence is ever going to convince you.

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,
Excellent question.

The miracles do testify to the Holy Spirit working through the Catholic Church; but they are not enough to convince me that the Catholic Church is the one and only true Church.

Think of it this way, if the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to an Anglican or a group of Anglicans—or if a Eucharistic miracle happened in an Anglican Church; would that cause you to leave the Catholic Church and become Anglican? That’s the best way I know to explain my reaction to Catholic miracles.

No, but it would certainly say something about the validity of the Eucharist in the Anglican Church, would it not?

I think the miracles that might be seen as a witness to the authority of the Catholic Church have a greater effect on non-Catholics, when they happen to non-Catholics.

No doubt.

I wrote this on a thread back in 2010. There is nothing sensational about this account, but it did affect my mom, my sister, and me; and caused us all to view the Catholic Church in a different light:

". . . .Many years ago, I visited St. Joseph’s Oratory in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I was with my mother and sister. This was a stop on our one-day bus tour of Montreal.

My mother was a very devout Christian, brought up in a Southern Baptist Church. As we walked through the candlelit hall leading to Frère André’s tomb, my Mom stopped to light a candle. I was really surprised. I could tell something was going on with her. After we left, she said she thought there really was something special about Brother André.’ She experienced a strong presence of the Holy Spirit. Keep in mind, my Mom was in no way “charismatic.” She really couldn’t quite put the experience into words. The experience did have a positive effect on her view of the Catholic Church.

Here I am nearly 30 years later, learning about the communion of the Saints; and I have this memory of my Mom’s experience on the site of Catholic pilgrimage and worship. There is something powerful about that.

Frère André was beatified in 1982. I think our trip to Montreal was around 1983 or 1984."

I love stories like that. Sometimes the more subtle experience is more powerful and stays with us longer than the fire works.

Having said all of that; I will say that I am particularly interested in the appearances of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and would like to read more about these miracles and the way in which they may point to the authority of the Catholic Church.

Peace and blessings,
Anna

There are many, many books on the subject. I will say, however, that one needs to tread carefully here. I would only read about those apparitions that have been approved by the Church. There are a lot of quacks out there with a lot of claims in this area.

Great to hear from you again.

Steve

 

[Just_a_person]

I am a former catholic and I have to say that many wiccans like me believe that those things are possible but I left the cathic church because it stressed that ONLY what they said could even possibaly be true. This is a sticking point with all non-catholics. I must say relax!!! Only tolerance and the willingness to try to understand us will do anything.:cool

 

[SteveVH]

I am a former catholic and I have to say that many wiccans like me believe that those things are possible but I left the cathic church because it stressed that ONLY what they said could even possibaly be true. This is a sticking point with all non-catholics. I must say relax!!! Only tolerance and the willingness to try to understand us will do anything.:cool

The Catholic Church has never “stressed that ONLY what they said could even possibaly be true”. The Church claims to possess the fullness of truth, but recongnizes truth wherever it may be found, even in non-Christian religions. But we are veering off the topic.

 

[exnihilo]

My question is simply; what do non-Catholics think about all of this? Does it influence your faith in any way? Does it say anything about the Catholic Church in your view? Do you think it is all a bunch of bunk?

I find it intriguing. It does seem the Catholic Church does a decent job of investigating and ruling out natural causes.

Regarding my faith I of course believe in miracles so it would confirm my faith. I do not believe miracles can only happen to devout Christians in the right church and I would imagine most Christians would agree.

Certain miracles if true might influence my opinion about the Catholic Church.

Honestly, sometimes it seems Catholics can be a little too superstitious. Then again I believe in the possibility of extraordinary miracles. Creation itself and life are extraordinary miracles. Sometimes I wish I had a more magical view of the world because it really is magical. I’d certainly side with the exuberant Catholics over some of the Protestants I’ve encountered who seem to want to explain away all things miraculous.

 

[Radical]

Nothing could be further from the truth. All miracles officially accepted by the Church have been validated scientifically; that is, they cannot be explained by science.

being unexplained is hardly being validated….there is much that science can’t explain ……Science can confirm that a tissue sample did come from a human heart, but it can’t confirm that the tissue sample arose from a piece of bread…b/c no scientific evidence exists of the alleged transformation…only anecdotal evidence….and often only anecdotal evidence that appears in the historical record centuries after the alleged Eucharistic miracle.

The Vatican even has an office called “Devil’s Advocate”. The entire purpose of this office is to disprove any miraculous claims.

just b/c a fellow throws out a lot of garbage…doesn’t mean that what he has left in his house is of any value.

In doing so they use outside experts specifically to insure credibility in the process. The miracles at Lourdes have been verified by secular physicians and other experts.

glad you brought up Lourdes…back in the day medical records were not extensive and so it wasn’t that easy to see if the miraculous healing was being claimed by someone who was actually crippled, blind etc. before…. but now, in the modern west, extensive medical records abound…so if Lourdes had actual, biblical quality miracles it should be no problem whatsoever to fill volumes with “before and after medical records” that would scientifically validate a miraculous change…you claim verification by secular physicians and other experts and I would love to see the before and after records that these secular physicians used…do you have a book title that you could reference?..you know with good records like x-rays, CT scans, MRIs etc. showing the miraculous changes.

The Church is not interested in creating a hoax. Why do you think it takes hundreds of years, in most cases, for a saint to be canonized?

please consider this description of a murder investigation and trial.

The scene of the crime is strictly controlled by the DA’s office…but no scientific procedure is followed in gathering evidence.

Years later, in the basement of the DA’s office an eager fellow examines a box that is labelled as evidence from the scene,….but there is no chain that traces the evidence from the scene to the basement box.

The DA’s office is convinced that Bob Smith committed the murder and sets out to prove the case. W/o any eye witnesses the DA’s office first interviews experts (selecting those that are already convinced that Bob is guilty)

The DA’s office then has the experts test the evidence…but the friendly experts aren’t even given free range to perform tests…the DA’s office controls and determines what samples will be tested (and which ones won’t) and what tests will be conducted(and which ones won’t).

The DA’s office then takes the case to trial, calling those friendly experts that can (at least) present some findings consistent with Bob being guilty.

The DA asks for a guilty verdict and is offended that the defense counsel thinks that his experts should be allowed to examine all the evidence and to conduct whatever tests that they think are appropriate…the judge is inclined to agree and wonders why the best tests, those that stood the best chance to provide conclusive results were not performed.

The young prosecutor stands up and protests, “The DA’s office is not interested in creating a hoax. It is not in the business of making up fairy tales. We have taken a long, long time in bringing this matter to trial.”

Notice any similarity?

Summary conclusions (“contra” indicates a contrary finding)
…… MC, alternatively, observed that the image had soaked through to the reverse of the tilma.[27]

please clarify….whilst it soaked through, did it also hover the whole time?

They have all been properly documented or they would not be accepted as miracles. You are free to do a search. I’m sure you’ll find two sides of the issue and again, make up your own mind, but based on the true evidence.

I want a proper investigation…not something that resembles Bob Smith’s trial

How do you know they are deteriorating slowly? What is your source?

here

Bodies don’t just slowly deteriorate over several hundred years

google natural mummification

What I know is that the studies that have been done are consistent in that the flesh is actually cardiac tissue which contains arterioles, veins, and nerve fibers.

which would be consistent with the hoaxer using a piece of human heart as opposed to slicing up a pig heart or a human thigh.

The blood type in all approved Eucharistic miracles is type AB, very common in mideastern men and uncommon elsewhere.

as blood ages and breaks down, it portrays AB characteristics (regardless of what type it was at the start)…any honest investigation would disclose that tendency and admit that nothing has been established.

But you know, as well as I, that no evidence is ever going to convince you.

not true at all…I have been very clear on the type of evidence and on the type of scientific procedure that I would find convincing…all we need is for the custodians of the Eucharistic miracle samples to step forward with the courage to live with the results….much to lose, but much to gain…and the truth to find.

 

[kimg901]

I want to believe in bigfoot, but, alas, I can’t. What a beautiful thing if he was real.

I’m not sure about all the miracles either.

He is !!! I seen him with my mother and aunt in washington state 18 years ago. I was soooooooooooo scared!!!