- Status
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
Interesting questions. I also have trouble with things like Stigmata. I’m sure there is thorough investigation, but I do wonder how we can know for sure that they aren’t self-harming. Lots of people self-harm for a variety of reasons. I don’t know…
S
stpiosson
Guest
Padre Pio was NOT a fraud in any way. Padre Pio was/is an exemplary priest and today is a Saint. Aside from being an exemplary priest Padre Pio attained great sanctity and was a man of God, devoted to prayer our Lord and Our Lady. It just stretches credulity that such a man would behave in a way to deceive.
Padre Pio gained nothing that would have led him to fake anything. All he really experienced as a result was huge amounts of additional work, hassle from multitudes of pilgrims and suspicion and persecution for a time, from certain people in the Church.
The problem is people cannot fathom sanctity and the supernatural hence their desire to attribute everything to fraud. They have no, or little faith.
Saint Pio, pray for us.
Padre Pio gained nothing that would have led him to fake anything. All he really experienced as a result was huge amounts of additional work, hassle from multitudes of pilgrims and suspicion and persecution for a time, from certain people in the Church.
The problem is people cannot fathom sanctity and the supernatural hence their desire to attribute everything to fraud. They have no, or little faith.
Saint Pio, pray for us.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
People sure do love to fixate on stigmata and whether they are “real” rather than fixating on how they themselves could perhaps love Jesus or their neighbor more on this very day.
F
FrancisPio
Guest
Padre Pios hands were looked at by many doctors. The wounds did not coincidence with that of an acid burn. Also, these wounds lasted for decades and suddenly disappeared without leaving any scar. That’s one magical acid formula
. More than this, Pio has had many miracles attributed to his intercession. His body is one of the few that in incorruptible.
Lastly, I’m not trying to convince you. I can’t say all the facts about Pio in this little thread. If you want to know the facts then read “Padre Pio, a true story - by Bernard Ruffin” . Read the facts and make up your own opinion. Miracles are riveting edge of your seat fascinating. Check it out.
. More than this, Pio has had many miracles attributed to his intercession. His body is one of the few that in incorruptible.Lastly, I’m not trying to convince you. I can’t say all the facts about Pio in this little thread. If you want to know the facts then read “Padre Pio, a true story - by Bernard Ruffin” . Read the facts and make up your own opinion. Miracles are riveting edge of your seat fascinating. Check it out.
Last edited:
T
Theo520
Guest
If someone is sick and then is cured, there will be a scientific explanation to the best of our ability. Your immune system is the vehicle that provides the cure.
Our faith should be about Spiritual growth, not doing cool magic tricks.
What I’m trying to say is, you are having the wrong discussion with people if your intent is to evangelize.
G
gracepoole
Guest
Well, sort of. The Devil’s Advocate position isn’t what it used to be. It changed significantly under the pontificate of JPII, which is when Padre Pio was beatified and canonized.
Q
QwertyGirl
Guest
There is no scientific proof. This is something you have to have faith about if you choose to believe it.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
The canonization process itself has “changed significantly” over the years.
I’m pretty sure the changes weren’t so they could push a bunch of questionable saints through, but rather to improve the process. At my work, and in the courts, and everywhere else, processes are continuously improved.
The vast amount of good that Padre Pio (and Mother Theresa, and other saints) have done both directly for people during their lifetime, and after their death through their intercession or example, is pretty obvious.
Furthermore, they have both been canonized by the Church, and Catholics are bound to accept the canonization, so suggesting that they are fraudulent or evil is slander, pure and simple, and shouldn’t be tolerated on a Catholic board.
it’s fine to talk about difficult aspects of their human personalities, such as the fact that Mother Theresa by her own admissions suffered from doubt and Padre Pio could sometimes be in a bad mood or may not have liked women wearing trousers or whatever, but claiming that they went around faking stigmata or stealing funds is going too far IMO.
I’m pretty sure the changes weren’t so they could push a bunch of questionable saints through, but rather to improve the process. At my work, and in the courts, and everywhere else, processes are continuously improved.
The vast amount of good that Padre Pio (and Mother Theresa, and other saints) have done both directly for people during their lifetime, and after their death through their intercession or example, is pretty obvious.
Furthermore, they have both been canonized by the Church, and Catholics are bound to accept the canonization, so suggesting that they are fraudulent or evil is slander, pure and simple, and shouldn’t be tolerated on a Catholic board.
it’s fine to talk about difficult aspects of their human personalities, such as the fact that Mother Theresa by her own admissions suffered from doubt and Padre Pio could sometimes be in a bad mood or may not have liked women wearing trousers or whatever, but claiming that they went around faking stigmata or stealing funds is going too far IMO.
Last edited:
P
pianistclare
Guest
I think I have now seen everything on CAF.
Padre Pio is a very wonderful saint with MANY untold, miracle attributed to his intercession, one in my own life, in fact.
That anyone would call him a fraud is terrible.
I consider Padre Pio one of the greatest intercessors of all time.
Padre Pio is a very wonderful saint with MANY untold, miracle attributed to his intercession, one in my own life, in fact.
That anyone would call him a fraud is terrible.
I consider Padre Pio one of the greatest intercessors of all time.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
As a Catholic, am I required to believe that St. Pio was devout and is a saint, OR am I required to believe that St. Pio was devout, is a saint, AND received the stigmata for 50 years?
On this journey, I’ve found that there are somethings in the church that are simply Dogma and they for required of the faithful, and then there are other things that are accepted and taught by the church, but not to the level of Dogma. And then there are yet other things that might be true that the church says you can believe or not (Carmel and the Brown Scapular for instance). It’s difficult to sort out what falls into what category. This is especially true since I was raised Baptist, and we didn’t have any of this sort of structure or dogma. It’s all very foreign and confusing to me.
I’ve been on this journey for well over a decade. I always tend to get all twisted up in knots as I try to sort out Catholic teaching (and eventually give up and go back to being Baptist until the next strong nudge toward Catholicism).
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
Whoever told you this? Have them bring you the documentation. A 20th century stigmatization is studied using the lastest state of the art scientific technique.
Citations, please.
Citations, please.
Q
QwertyGirl
Guest
I am not sure about this. I believe you aren’t under obligation, as as catholic, to believe the claims about the saints. I could be wrong, though. Any other CAFers know the Church teaching on this?
Tis_Bearself
Patron
When the Vatican canonizes someone, you are required to accept the Vatican decision on their sainthood. In other words, if the Vatican canonizes Padre Pio, you are required to believe he is in Heaven and is a saint, because to do otherwise is rejecting the official Church pronouncement of the Vatican.
Claiming that Padre Pio or any other saint committed fraudulent or evil acts would be implicitly going against the Church teaching by suggesting a serious moral failing in a person they have personally endorsed as holy. (The exception would be a saint like St. Augustine who had an admitted and well-documented period of committing sins in his life before he repented and began to live a devout life.)
However, you are not required to believe any private revelation of a saint. Therefore, you do not need to believe that Padre Pio saw visions. Similarly, while it is required that you accept that Francesco and Jacinta Marto, the Fatima seer children, are saints in heaven, you are not required to believe that Mary said particular things to them.
With respect to stigmata, you are required to accept whatever the church position on it is. If we’re talking about some un-canonized person, you can think what you like about their stigmata. If we’re talking about the canonized saint Padre Pio, or the historical saint Francis of Assisi, then you can remain neutral on their stigmata and say perhaps that you don’t know what caused it and maybe there was a natural explanation for it, but claiming that they fraudulently self-injured is a bit much, because you’re accusing a canonized person in heaven of being a liar about something very material.
Claiming that Padre Pio or any other saint committed fraudulent or evil acts would be implicitly going against the Church teaching by suggesting a serious moral failing in a person they have personally endorsed as holy. (The exception would be a saint like St. Augustine who had an admitted and well-documented period of committing sins in his life before he repented and began to live a devout life.)
However, you are not required to believe any private revelation of a saint. Therefore, you do not need to believe that Padre Pio saw visions. Similarly, while it is required that you accept that Francesco and Jacinta Marto, the Fatima seer children, are saints in heaven, you are not required to believe that Mary said particular things to them.
With respect to stigmata, you are required to accept whatever the church position on it is. If we’re talking about some un-canonized person, you can think what you like about their stigmata. If we’re talking about the canonized saint Padre Pio, or the historical saint Francis of Assisi, then you can remain neutral on their stigmata and say perhaps that you don’t know what caused it and maybe there was a natural explanation for it, but claiming that they fraudulently self-injured is a bit much, because you’re accusing a canonized person in heaven of being a liar about something very material.
Last edited:
P
pianistclare
Guest
Also, to the doubters here, the church doesn’t canonize people willy-nilly. They purposely select scientists to check facts and do tests (even atheists in the various forensic and medical fields) to see if something has a natural cause, versus miraculous qualities. The Church has no interest in promoting fallacy.
To even suggest such a sham is to display an extreme lack of the process, the CHurch and her beliefs, and those who have gone on to Sainthood.
I know of two priests who have also had amazing experiences from their devotion to Padre Pio, and my husbands’ family was very close to Fr Alessio, someone close to Padre Pio in his lifetime. They heard first-hand of the struggles and miraculous healings attributed to his intercession.
To even suggest such a sham is to display an extreme lack of the process, the CHurch and her beliefs, and those who have gone on to Sainthood.
I know of two priests who have also had amazing experiences from their devotion to Padre Pio, and my husbands’ family was very close to Fr Alessio, someone close to Padre Pio in his lifetime. They heard first-hand of the struggles and miraculous healings attributed to his intercession.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
Ok. Well, I have no problem believing he was a saint. Whatever it was that he said, did, saw, or felt I don’t know. However, it’s clear he lived a life devoted to God.
The stigmata thing is difficult. There could be alternative explanations that don’t require him to be a fraud. For instance, he could have self-harmed sub-consciously. Or, they could have been psychosomatic marks. In either case, he would not have been deceptive. And, more to the point, the wounds would have seemed supernatural to him. Additionally, those wounds would have been an outward reflection of how strongly he felt about God and how awesome he believed God’s power to be. It’s an amazing testimony to his faith!
The stigmata thing is difficult. There could be alternative explanations that don’t require him to be a fraud. For instance, he could have self-harmed sub-consciously. Or, they could have been psychosomatic marks. In either case, he would not have been deceptive. And, more to the point, the wounds would have seemed supernatural to him. Additionally, those wounds would have been an outward reflection of how strongly he felt about God and how awesome he believed God’s power to be. It’s an amazing testimony to his faith!
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself
Patron
Yes, and in my opinion, you are free to think this way.
There is a school of thought that stigmatics develop their marks because of their great love for Jesus and desire to be united with Jesus in his sufferings, which eventually manifests as a physical outward sign in the form of the marks. One could argue over whether this is a supernatural process or some normal process driven by the mind.
However, to say “Padre Pio faked his stigmata with carbolic acid and was therefore a fraud” is unacceptable once he has been canonized, because one must accept that the Church looked very carefully at that possibility and rejected it.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
There is another Monk with Stigmata and crown of thorns wounds over the Triduum. People are flocking to him. The Vatican have told him that he cannot see people until they have verified his stigmata.
P
philipl
Guest
No, now that doesnt mean it is a good thing. The only thing you have to believe are things declared “Ex Cathedra” Now there has been many discussion of just what is Ex Cathedra and what isnt. Since I believe that only two things have been declared so I am not required to believe Pio is a saint. I think he is, but remember any private revelations such as his stigmata add nothing to what has already been revealed.
C
CRM_Brother
Guest
Hello michael-kaw,
These rumors stem from a single report made by Augustino Gemelli to Pope Pius XII. Augustino Gemelli was a Franciscan and a medical doctor who was the first President of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. It was Gemelli who convinced Pope Pius XII to order Pio to not allow Padre Pio to show his wounds to anyone without written Papal approval. At this point, Two physicians had already examined the wounds and could make no diagnosis, but had commented that the wound edges were smooth and not made by an instrument. One of these physicians was the official doctor of Pope Benedict XV. Gemelli went of his own accord to Padre Pio and demanded to examine the wounds. As Gemelli did not have written authorization from the Pope, Padre Pio did not allow the examination as attested by the other brothers in Pio’s community. Angry, Gemelli returned to the Pope and told Pius XII that Pio was a fraud and, in examining the wounds, found them to be self inflicted and that Pio was psychotic. It was only later that the Pope found out that Gemelli had lied about the examination and the restrictions placed upon Pio were rescinded.
God bless,
Br. Ben, CRM
These rumors stem from a single report made by Augustino Gemelli to Pope Pius XII. Augustino Gemelli was a Franciscan and a medical doctor who was the first President of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. It was Gemelli who convinced Pope Pius XII to order Pio to not allow Padre Pio to show his wounds to anyone without written Papal approval. At this point, Two physicians had already examined the wounds and could make no diagnosis, but had commented that the wound edges were smooth and not made by an instrument. One of these physicians was the official doctor of Pope Benedict XV. Gemelli went of his own accord to Padre Pio and demanded to examine the wounds. As Gemelli did not have written authorization from the Pope, Padre Pio did not allow the examination as attested by the other brothers in Pio’s community. Angry, Gemelli returned to the Pope and told Pius XII that Pio was a fraud and, in examining the wounds, found them to be self inflicted and that Pio was psychotic. It was only later that the Pope found out that Gemelli had lied about the examination and the restrictions placed upon Pio were rescinded.
God bless,
Br. Ben, CRM
Last edited:
- Status