Why is this a miracle?

[Ammonius_Saccus]

The Vatican has officially certified the medical cases of two Brazilian women as divinely inspired miracles that justify the sainthood of Galvao.

snip

“The doctors told me to pray because only a miracle could save her,” Daniela’s mother Jacyra said recently. “My sister sneaked into the intensive care unit and forced my daughter to swallow Friar Galvao’s pills.”

A few days later, a cured Daniela was discharged from the hospital.

But doubters remain.

“That was no miracle,” said Roberto Focaccia, an infectious disease expert at the hospital where Daniela was treated. "Statistics show that an average of 50 percent of these patients die and the other 50 percent recover completely. She was lucky to be among the 50 percent who survive.

How does the Catholic Church know this particular case was a miracle? How does the Catholic Church know she was not just a part of the 50% that recover? What is the evidence that this case is a miracle?

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070509/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/brazil_pope_saint

Edit - I only want to discuss the Daniela case even though the quote I included discusses two cases.

 

[adrift]

How does the Catholic Church know this particular case was a miracle? How does the Catholic Church know she was not just a part of the 50% that recover? What is the evidence that this case is a miracle?

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070509/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/brazil_pope_saint

Edit - I only want to discuss the Daniela case even though the quote I included discusses two cases.

Nearly 10 years before that, Daniela Cristina da Silva, then 4 years old, entered a coma and suffered a heart attack after liver and kidney complications from hepatitis A.

“The doctors told me to pray because only a miracle could save her,” Daniela’s mother Jacyra said recently. “My sister sneaked into the intensive care unit and forced my daughter to swallow Friar Galvao’s pills.”

It seems to me that when he talks about 50 % recovery he is speaking of the recovery from the hepatitis. This little girl had more wrong with her. A heart attack at age 4? Wow for her to recover seems like a miracle to me.

As to your question, we don’t have all that the investigators would have so it is impossible to answer your question.

 

[Ammonius_Saccus]

It seems to me that when he talks about 50 % recovery he is speaking of the recovery from the hepatitis. This little girl had more wrong with her. A heart attack at age 4? Wow for her to recover seems like a miracle to me.

As you your question, we don’t have all that the investigators would have so it is impossible to answer you.

Will the Catholic Church present its evidence in an open manner?

 

[LilyM]

Will the Catholic Church present its evidence in an open manner?

Firstly the Church, as I understand it, relies on independent scientific and medical advice to determine such things - ie not from Catholic physicians or scientists, rather from acknowledged experts in their fields of all different faiths or lack thereof.

Secondly, the Church isn’t looking to canonise little-known Brazilian friars, it has 10,000 saints on the calendar already and no need for more.

So I think, given this, that if these experts say it’s a miracle they can be trusted.

 

[epostle]

How does the Catholic Church know this particular case was a miracle? How does the Catholic Church know she was not just a part of the 50% that recover? What is the evidence that this case is a miracle?

First, look at what yahoo news is saying"

The Vatican has officially certified the medical cases of two Brazilian women as divinely inspired miracles that justify the sainthood of Galvao.

Miracles are supernatural events as a result of God’s grace, the bible is divinely inspired, so they got that wrong. I don’t give much credit to the Associated Press speaking on behalf of the Vatican. They have an agenda.

Secondly, justification of sainthood does not hinge on two miracles. That is but one minimum requirement, and the Church is faced with 5000 reported miracles to sort out.
It is up to the Church to decide how any given miracles are to be applied to the process and which ones, not yahoo news.

None of the news articles I read indicate that these particular cases are being used by the church in the beatification process, it says that the Vatican has “officially certified the medical cases”. Well, they got that wrong too. It’s not done by the Vatican, its done by an independent board of doctors, the best in the world, and the Church goes by medical science when medical science says they have no explanation.

No “miracle” that resulted from a superstitious act would get past stage 1. A miracle, even if authentic, would not be permitted in the process if the healing occurred by these little paper pills because they had been banned by the archbishop. Just because there is a lot of superstitious behavior among that population in no way makes the saint less holy. The media is guilty of instilling contempt against Catholics by making a mockery of the canonization process, and by making all Catholics look like superstitious fools.

IF healings occur because of a persons faith in a little paper pill, thanks be to God. It’s God that does the healing, not the pill.

Here is a site that lists the criteria for a miracle for Lourdes. I can’t say for sure the same criteria is used for canonization, but it probably is. geocities.com/meta_crock/other/Miracles.htm

 

[Ammonius_Saccus]

Well, they got that wrong too. It’s not done by the Vatican, its done by an independent board of doctors, the best in the world, and the Church goes by medical science when medical science says they have no explanation.

Are you sure? The Catholic Encyclopedia on newadvent.com says that a decree confirmed by the Pope is issued stating there is proof of miracles.

Also, just because medical science cannot explain a cure does not mean that it is a miracle. Does the Catholic Church require actual evidence that it is a miracle or is it enough that medical science cannot explain it? Is an argument from ignorance good enough to prove a miracle?

The discussion of the particular miracles proceeds in exactly the same way and in the same order as that of the virtues. If the decisions be favourable, the general meeting of the congregation is followed by a decree, confirmed by the pope, in which it is announced that there is proof of miracles.

newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm

 

[LilyM]

Are you sure? The Catholic Encyclopedia on newadvent.com says that a decree confirmed by the Pope is issued stating there is proof of miracles.

Also, just because medical science cannot explain a cure does not mean that it is a miracle. Does the Catholic Church require actual evidence that it is a miracle or is it enough that medical science cannot explain it? Is an argument from ignorance good enough to prove a miracle?

newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm

Most miracles are more than just something unexplainable in an area that science is ignorant of - they’re something that fly completely in the face of established science. Say a disease that has been around for centuries and invariably fatal - if someone was cured of it after praying to a saint, that’d come close at least to meriting the label ‘miraculous’.

 

[clmowry]

Since there is no way to “prove” a miracle, doesn’t it always hinge on some thing like X was wrong. I prayed for help and X isn’t wrong any more. Then the experts involved can’t explain it.

i.e. The tumor was there then poof its gone. Nobody operated. I can’t “prove” it was a miracle but something the Dr. can’t explain has happened.

Chuck

Also, just because medical science cannot explain a cure does not mean that it is a miracle. Does the Catholic Church require actual evidence that it is a miracle or is it enough that medical science cannot explain it? Is an argument from ignorance good enough to prove a miracle.