Sunday's homily on the scientific testing of consecrated host found to be heart tissue

[Neofight]

I don’t think he “missed the point”, he may just have missed your point. I think Father was speaking not of Eucharistic miracles, but was more focused on the Solemnity of Corpus Christi.

And, I certainly was not suggesting you used homily helps, however, I see no reason why the use of them should cast any shadow on the ability of a homilist.

Peace and all good!

 

[Bonnie]

Please, do refute it, if it’s so easy.

I’m not saying I jump on the miracle bandwagon at the first sign, but your statement is, quite frankly rude in calling those of us who do accept miracles gullible.

This particular miracle is not easy for me to refute as I don’t have the resources. Others are much easier. For instance, there is a thread here at CA about a nun in Kenya who claimed to have taken photographs of Jesus. The picture looked familiar to me so I did some Googling around. Turns out the picture is one that was drawn by a Hungarian artist named Semiechen in the early 20th century. The nun - or someone - took a photograph of the drawing. She may well have believed she took a photograph of Jesus. No way to know that.

As I Protestant, I saw dubious miracles such as the “lengthening” of a “short” leg. Very easy to fake, even unintentionally. As a Catholic, I saw a rosary that the owner claimed turned to gold at Medjugorje. It just looked tarnished to me; she didn’t take it to a jeweler to have it verified. I think she really wanted to believe it to be gold, but was afraid it wasn’t.

When I was in my teens I took as Gospel truth the account of a man that NASA had proven the “missing days” from the OT accounts of the sun being stopped. It was a total fabrication. I felt very dumb having believed it.

I’m sorry you were offended, but I do consider anyone who accepts purported “miracles” as real without any solid proof to be gullible.

For the record, I still have problems believing in transubstantiation and the afterlife, even after nearly 40 years a Catholic. Perhaps my name should be Thomasina.

 

[Memaw]

Wishing there were a Catholic version of Snopes…I can’t imagine going up to receive Communion hearing that I was about to get “heart tissue.”

Really?? Didn’t Jesus say, “My Flesh is Food indeed.” As long as it’s Our Lord, that’s all that matters. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Neofight]

Actually, it may have been my bad, brother…I used the word “nonsense”, and it admittedly was a poor choice. I meant was Father was emphasizing the importance of the Blessed Sacrament even without “miracles”…and I would tend to agree, because in my mind the very Sacrament is a miracle in itself!

Peace and all Good!

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Yes, thank you. Of course, that was my point, and undoubtedly the point of my priest’s homily.

The bread and wine are signs of Christ’s presence. The accidents have often been described as a veil covering the Sacred Presence. In short, they are not Christ’s body and blood but signs that he is present wherever the signs are present.

Linus2nd

 

[irishpatrick]

So, am I understanding the many posters here correctly? That they doubt the truth of this claimed miracle? Yet, do those same posters understand that during every valid Consecration the Bread and Wine are literally transformed into Jesus Real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity? Is it somehow a “bigger” or more “amazing” miracle that the Body might contain heart tissue when tested?

The source and summit of our faith is the Eucharist, because the Eucharist truly is Jesus. It seems clear to me, now, why surveys reflect that a scant 30% of Catholics believe in the Real Presence.

 

[glendab]

Hello Bonnie.

This particular miracle is not easy for me to refute as I don’t have the resources. Others are much easier. For instance, there is a thread here at CA about a nun in Kenya who claimed to have taken photographs of Jesus. The picture looked familiar to me so I did some Googling around. Turns out the picture is one that was drawn by a Hungarian artist named Semiechen in the early 20th century. The nun - or someone - took a photograph of the drawing. She may well have believed she took a photograph of Jesus. No way to know that.

As I Protestant, I saw dubious miracles such as the “lengthening” of a “short” leg. Very easy to fake, even unintentionally. As a Catholic, I saw a rosary that the owner claimed turned to gold at Medjugorje. It just looked tarnished to me; she didn’t take it to a jeweler to have it verified. I think she really wanted to believe it to be gold, but was afraid it wasn’t.

When I was in my teens I took as Gospel truth the account of a man that NASA had proven the “missing days” from the OT accounts of the sun being stopped. It was a total fabrication. I felt very dumb having believed it.

I’m sorry you were offended, but I do consider anyone who accepts purported “miracles” as real without any solid proof to be gullible.

For the record, I still have problems believing in transubstantiation and the afterlife, even after nearly 40 years a Catholic. Perhaps my name should be Thomasina.

A healthy skepticism if you ask me. I too receive news of miracles with skepticism, but once they are verified by the Church, I accept them as they are - miraculous. I too have heard about bogus stuff and can easily recognize bunko when I see it. Memorable was a piece of toast that reportedly had an image of the BVM. Ummmmm…what can be said about that?

The Church has an obligation to the faithful to investigate all accounts of miracles reported to them to protect the faithful from fraud and they do deal with this stuff day in and day out. The wheat gets separated from the chaff.

Glenda

 

[Iconodule]

I don’t know much about such things. I was told by a monk once that the Holy Mysteries are given to us not to change things into what they should be, but to reveal to us what they truly are. That’s easy for me to understand.

 

[DOJ96]

Thank you all for your thoughts - there is a lot of really good information here! I will definitely be reading the references provided.

As a convert, I’m always trying to learn more…even from my 6 year old when she comes home from PSR! In RCIA, we learned that through Transubstantiation, the bread and wine become Body and Blood of Jesus in spirit or essence, retaining their physical properties. That is enough for me and I believe.

 

[Beryllos]

Regarding the OP’s priest’s story of a consecrated host being tested in a lab, I would like to understand the reasoning of the person who authorized that test. If I went to my parish priest and said “Father, bring a consecrated host to the biology lab so I can perform some tests,” I suspect he would say “No can do, my son. That would be a sacrilege.” What do you think? Is it morally acceptable to submit the Precious Body and Blood to laboratory examination? Did Jesus say “Take this and analyze it.”? I think not!

It is written in Scripture, “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.”

Furthermore, if you have a host that looks, smells, and tastes like bread, in other words has the accidents of bread, why wouldn’t those accidents extend as well to the chemical and biological analysis? I am inclined to think that laboratory instruments follow the same physical laws as our own senses. Why would you expect a laboratory test to be more revealing on matters of faith or miracles?

Now, it’s a different story if the bread and wine miraculously took on the appearance of flesh, and then you submitted it for testing. Your 2 atheist researchers would assume it is some kind of animal flesh. If testing indicated that it is of human origin, they would conclude that you got a human tissue specimen from the hospital or elsewhere. I don’t think they would faint dead away for 20 minutes. They would probably become quite agitated, wondering where you got it, how many rules you broke to get it, and whether it carried any communicable diseases.

Call me skeptical.

 

[glendab]

Hello Everyone!

Here is a book you can get for cheap at Amazon and it is very helpful in showing off more than a few Eucharistic Miracles. Get to help a skeptic get over the squimishness about such stuff:

Eucharistic Miracles and Eucharistic Phenomena in the Lives of the Saints by Joan Carroll Cruz amazon.com/Eucharistic-Miracles-Phenomena-Lives-Saints/dp/0895553031/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1403809145&sr=1-2&keywords=carroll+cruz

Happy reading.

Glenda

 

[Joan_M]

In March of this year I was at a Divine Mercy Conference at which Dr. Ricardo Castanon was one of the speakers. Dr, Ricardo was an atheist at the time that he was requested to look into the apparent miracle. He undertook to do this, in order to refute the miracle.

Instead, he was shocked when various laboratories undertook testing of the bloody tissue e had submitted, particularly by the final tests. (I have some of the literature given out at the conference, but cannot put my hand on it at this moment). The doctor who had analyzed the test results told Dr. Ricardo “your patient suffered greatly.” And went on to tell him that - there were white blood cells in the sample given for testing (this would normally be impossible unless the sample had been taken from a living human being, as white cells disappear in a very short time from blood extracted.); the patient had been beaten badly about the chest. I cant remember the other details, but the sample had come from the heart - in fact the left ventricle, if I am not mistaken.

I think it was these words from a highly respected and qualified medical expert that finally convinced an atheist that this was a miracle. Dr. Ricardo is not a convinced Catholic who speaks regularly all over the world about the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist.

Believe. God still provides us with miracles - probably because we can be so incredulous!

 

[detoutcoeur]

During his homily last Sunday for the Feast of Corpus Christi, our pastor also talked about Eucharistic miracles, including this one:

ncregister.com/daily-news/truth-or-hoax-alleged-eucharistic-miracle-under-investigation-in-mexico/

 

[MaryT777]

Actually, it may have been my bad, brother…I used the word “nonsense”, and it admittedly was a poor choice. I meant was Father was emphasizing the importance of the Blessed Sacrament even without “miracles”…and I would tend to agree, because in my mind the very Sacrament is a miracle in itself!

Peace and all Good!

Well said. Love the point Father made that the Sacrament is a miracle in itself!~
Amen.
Mary.

 

[JimG]

Thank you all for your thoughts - there is a lot of really good information here! I will definitely be reading the references provided.

As a convert, I’m always trying to learn more…even from my 6 year old when she comes home from PSR! In RCIA, we learned that through Transubstantiation, the bread and wine become Body and Blood of Jesus in spirit or essence, retaining their physical properties. That is enough for me and I believe.

Just to clarify a bit: The bread and wine become Jesus real body and blood (actually the whole Jesus), in essence, yes. That’s because the essence (substance) of the bread and wine has been changed into Jesus.

One can say that the physical properties of bread and wine remain. Physical properties are always appearances or accidents. But those physical properties do not, after the consecration, inhere in the bread and wine, because the substance of the bread and wine is gone. The appearances (physical properties) of bread and wine remain, but the substance of bread and wine has been changed into Jesus. And Jesus does not take on the physical properties or appearances of bread and wine, so those properties inhere in no substance at all.

I’d better stop now!

 

[Neofight]

So, am I understanding the many posters here correctly? That they doubt the truth of this claimed miracle? Yet, do those same posters understand that during every valid Consecration the Bread and Wine are literally transformed into Jesus Real Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity? Is it somehow a “bigger” or more “amazing” miracle that the Body might contain heart tissue when tested?

The source and summit of our faith is the Eucharist, because the Eucharist truly is Jesus. It seems clear to me, now, why surveys reflect that a scant 30% of Catholics believe in the Real Presence.

No, I don’t think you are understanding them correctly.

May I suggest Thomas Aquinas’ writings on the Eucharist. It might fill in the blanks for you.
Also, research the many comments on the accidents of the Eucharist.

Peace and all Good.

 

[irishpatrick]

No, I don’t think you are understanding them correctly.

May I suggest Thomas Aquinas’ writings on the Eucharist. It might fill in the blanks for you.
Also, research the many comments on the accidents of the Eucharist.

Peace and all Good.

Thanks for the reference, yet it does not adress my post. I have no need for fill-in-the-blanks. The Eucharist is fully Jesus, His actual Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. The Eucharist (Jesus) remains hidden in the sign of the bread and wine, yet make no mistake, the Eucharist is fully and wholly Jesus. No mere symbol, not only a sign, truly Jesus.

It does not surprise me that in today’s world, with so many challenges to the faith, that so many would not believe in the Real Presence–after all, the majority left Jesus after His Bread of Life discourse (John chapter 6) and they heard the truth direct from Jesus.

 

[St_Francis]

Regarding the OP’s priest’s story of a consecrated host being tested in a lab, I would like to understand the reasoning of the person who authorized that test. If I went to my parish priest and said “Father, bring a consecrated host to the biology lab so I can perform some tests,” I suspect he would say “No can do, my son. That would be a sacrilege.” What do you think? Is it morally acceptable to submit the Precious Body and Blood to laboratory examination? Did Jesus say “Take this and analyze it.”? I think not!

It is written in Scripture, “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.”

Furthermore, if you have a host that looks, smells, and tastes like bread, in other words has the accidents of bread, why wouldn’t those accidents extend as well to the chemical and biological analysis? I am inclined to think that laboratory instruments follow the same physical laws as our own senses. Why would you expect a laboratory test to be more revealing on matters of faith or miracles?

**Now, it’s a different story if the bread and wine miraculously took on the appearance of flesh, and then you submitted it for testing. **Your 2 atheist researchers would assume it is some kind of animal flesh. If testing indicated that it is of human origin, they would conclude that you got a human tissue specimen from the hospital or elsewhere. I don’t think they would faint dead away for 20 minutes. They would probably become quite agitated, wondering where you got it, how many rules you broke to get it, and whether it carried any communicable diseases.

Call me skeptical.

What I bolded is precisely what happened; in fact, has happened several times. If you read the description of the events in the OP, the Host was (improperly ) disposed of and was then found by someone after Mass. The priest instructed her to put the Host into water and then into the Tabernacle, where it was left for several days. When it was taken out again, it had a bloody appearance, and so was kept for a few years, after which it was tested.

Check out some of the links people have given. The Youtube one on the first page is, I believe, the one of a talk of Dr Castanon’s (sp?). I saw it several years ago and was very moved. Totally worth watching, bit be prepared for subtitles.

 

[St_Francis]

It’s also these types of unverified miracles that tend to make the Catholic Faith look superstitious in my opinion.
Mary.

Yes, unverified miracles can cause the appearance of superstition, bit the Church is very careful to verify claims of miracles very carefully. For example, the criteria are so strict that even tho thousands have been cured at Lourdes, only 67 have “passed” the verification tests the Church requires. ((Link)

Remember that the Church has and has always had a high regard for reason.

 

[JimG]

Thanks for the reference, yet it does not adress my post. I have no need for fill-in-the-blanks. The Eucharist is fully Jesus, His actual Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. The Eucharist (Jesus) remains hidden in the sign of the bread and wine, yet make no mistake, the Eucharist is fully and wholly Jesus. No mere symbol, not only a sign, truly Jesus.

It does not surprise me that in today’s world, with so many challenges to the faith, that so many would not believe in the Real Presence–after all, the majority left Jesus after His Bread of Life discourse (John chapter 6) and they heard the truth direct from Jesus.

Yes, you are correct. Jesus is wholly present in the Eucharist–his entire body and blood, every part of him. We do not perceive his proper appearances because he is hidden under the appearances of bread and wine, which do not inhere in him. Perhaps the purpose of a Eucharistic miracle is to bring home that profound truth.