In the New Testament, Jesus famously declared to his disciples that bread and wine (ceremonially presented as the Eucharist) were representations of His flesh and blood (Matt. 26:26-28, Mk. 14:22-24, Lk. 22:19-20, Jn. 6:22-59). Christian denominations throughout history have interpreted this declaration in different ways; Protestants (depending on the denomination) consider it to be metaphorical in the sense that communion represents the flesh and blood of Christ, but does not literally become it. Catholics on the other hand take this affirmation literally, and believe that the Eucharist actually becomes the real flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. Such a notion has been deemed understandably strange to many, and has gained the ridicule of both protestants and atheists alike. Sam Harris, a famous opponent of Christianity, comically snided that, "If you wake up tomorrow morning thinking that saying a few Latin words over your pancakes is gonna turn them into the body of Elvis Presley, ok, you have lost your mind. But if you think more or less the same thing about a cracker and the body of Jesus, you’re just a Catholic." [1]
In juxtaposition to the skeptic's cynicism, historically the Eucharist has had many demonstrably miraculous aspects attributed to it. Exorcists for example will on occasion conceal the Eucharist to see if an allegedly possessed individual will be able to sense the presence of the Blessed object. If a person believed to be possessed by a demon can determine whether or not the Eucharist is present, that is believed to be certification of both the individual's inoculation by an unclean spirit and the sanctity of the Eucharist as the body of Christ.
Other kinds of Eucharist miracles involve remarkable properties of the host itself. An old but requisite example is the Miracle of Faverney, which took place in Eastern France over the course of three days in 1608.[2] That Sunday (May 25) the communion wafer was put into a monstrance (a shrine that displays the eucharist for veneration) in celebration of Pentecost. A fire broke out from oil lamps in the church, and much of the building was set ablaze. Monday morning the shrine was seen completely untouched by the flames and, more incredibly, was floating in the air. The miracle was a very public event that was investigated by the locals, having quickly gathered a very large crowd. Thousands of people in the area visited the church to see the monstrance levitating. On Tuesday May 27 the shrine eventually descended onto the alter, having been in the air for a total of 33 hours. [3] The event was eventually declared a miracle by the local bishop. Another modern example was publicized only a few days ago, involving a host from a parish in Guadalajara, Mexico, allegedly pulsating like a heart within the monstrance. The phenomenon was caught on video and the witnesses interviewed by the head of the diocese. Though it has been determined that the video was not tampered with, the bishop has yet to declare the event a miracle. One may suppose that some sort of optical illusion, coupled with religious enthusiasm, sparked the episode, though a source for such illumination has yet to be demonstrated.
Bar none, the most well-known of these categories of Roman Catholic miracles involve the supernatural transformation of the host. This is derived from the theological dogma of transubstantiation, in which Catholics believe the communion wafer and wine transform into the essence of Christ's body, albeit in a manner invisible to the senses. However, such a claim is not necessarily built merely on faith. Reports of communion wafers transforming into human flesh and blood have been reported for well over 1,000 years. The well-known 13th century Church Father Thomas Aquinas commented on a Eucharist miracle in his own day.[4]
Aquinas's disciples down the line have followed suite in these claims, and reports of this nature are still not uncommon today. Below is a summary of the more notable cases of more modern cases of alleged Eucharist transformation and the evidence used to support their legitimacy. One does not have to go to the Medieval period to find stories of communion wafers transforming into flesh and blood. One 2001 case in Chirattakonam, India not only had blood form on the communion wafer, but the blood shaped to make the face of a man (presumably, Jesus Christ). [5]
 |
| Eucharistic miracle of Chirattakonam, India, 2001 |
Many researchers have sought to gain as much data on this strange phenomenon as possible. Perhaps most notably would be Dr. Franco Serafini, a cardiologist and graduate from Bolgna University, who has done extensive research on various Eucharist miracles.[6] Serafini has traveled to places like Italy, Poland, Argentina, etc to analyze this phenomenon, and has interviewed the scientists involved in studying the Eucharist samples. What impressed Serafini was the consistency of the reports; for example, in the 5 cases he investigated, all involved Eucharists that contained heart tissue, contained AB blood types,[7] and all showed signs of a heart under intense stress and pain (samples resembled hearts that underwent heart attacks).[8] Dr. Ricardo Castanon Gomez is a psychologist who has also conducted research in this area, and provided samples of the Eucharist for doctors to examine.[9] In cases occurring in Mexico and Argentina, a communion wafer began to bleed, and doctors were sent to investigate. Gomez had multiple specialists look at the wafer, and all concluded that the sample was of a human heart, and that it contained white blood cells (which usually deteriorate within 15 minutes).
Of these more recent Eucharist miracles, a few in particular stand out as noteworthy and will be briefly discussed below.
The Miracle of Lanciano
Perhaps the most famous miracle of this kind would be in Lanciano, Italy where a communion wafer reportedly became flesh and blood in the 8th century AD when a priest who doubted the doctrine of transubstantiation suddenly witnessed the supernatural transformation. Investigation into the miracle (at least, investigations that we have documentary evidence of) did not occur until hundreds of years later in the 1500s onward. This is problematic due to the fact that we have virtually no evidence that the sample in the 16th century shrine actually dates to the 8th century, "The first document [of the Lanciano miracle), unfortunately, only dates from 1636 and therefore it has but relative value, being much later than the miracle itself."[10] During examinations of this time, a new miracle was realized: the seperate pieces of the transformed communion wafer, which were all different sizes, were all equal in weight. Likewise, when placed together, they weight of the total pieces was equal to the weight of each individual piece. This, however, has not been replicated in modern analysis of the wafer. [11]
In the 20th century, the flesh of Lanciano was investigated using modern technology. Dr. Odardo Linoli, who was the former head of the Laboratory of Pathological Anatomy at the Hospital of Arezzo, examined and photographed the material of the Eucharist to determine its composition. His findings were published in the Italian medical journal Quaderni Sclavo di Diagnostica Clinica e di Laboratori in 1971, and his study claimed that the sample examined was indeed human flesh, specifically from the heart.[12] The blood type was AB, which is the same type of blood found in various Catholic relics like the infamous Shroud of Turin [13], and as will be seen below, is a common element shared among these accounts. Due to the precision and shape of the flesh, Linoli stated that it was unlikely that the cells could have come from a dead body, "Supposing that the heart was taken from a dead body, we have to consider that only a trained hand in anatomic dissection could have obtained, with no difficulty, from a cave organ an "even and continuous slice" considering that the first anatomic dissections on human body, have been made after the 14th century."[14] In other words, in the judgement of the doctor, there was no surgical equipment from the 8th century AD that could replicate the precision found in the Lanciano sample.
Further studies were conducted up until 1981 by Rugerro Bertelli from the University of Sienca, and rendered similar results. Another study was published in a journal on medieval science in 2016 defended Linoli's study, though without itself attempting to replicate his findings, “In 1970-1981 works of Prof. Linoli on the samples extracted in 1970 have proved that Meat and Blood belong to the AB group, the Meat is a section of the heart, impossible to make in the eighth century." [15] The Lanciano Eucharist is therefore considered miraculous for many reasons: 1) the wafer is actual flesh and blood from a human heart, 2) it is cut and formed in such a way that a person from the 8th century would be unable to reproduce, 3) the different sizes and pieces of the specimen are all equal in weight. The first of these facts seems indisputable, the second is an idiosyncratic judgement that has yet to be extensively scrutinized, and the third is a claim that from the 16th century that has not been replicated or verified with modern instruments.
Miracle of Buenos Aires
The Buenos Aires Eucharist miracle occurred in August of 1996, where a host appeared to bleed after being placed in water.[16] Photographs were taken around 2 months later, and investigations were allowed in 1999.[17] Dr. Frederick Zugibe, a pathologist from Columbia University, examined slides provided by journalists Mike Willesee and Ron Tesoriero. He stated in a signed letter that, "prior to rendering my opinion, I was not informed of the history of the material." Zugibe confirmed that the sample was from a human heart that was in distress, appearing as if it had suffered a heart attack or a blow to the chest. Ron Tesoriero claims that he witnessed Zugibe state that the material was still living, and that he stated that the phenomenon was medically inexplicable; however, this detail was not found in the original letter provided, and I am unaware of any evidence of this apart from Tesoriero's testimony.[18] Photographed scans of Zugibe's letter can be found online, with the first page presented below. [19] DNA testing was also performed on the sample (the scans of the original forensic documents are present on the Internet), but results were inconclusive. [20] Though it does nothing in terms of effecting the credibility or incredibility of the Eucharist's legitimacy, I will point out (merely as a point of interest) that the investigative process to examine the Buenos Aires miracle was overseen by then-bishop Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who is now the current Pope Francis.
.jpg) |
| Photo of Buenos Aires Eucharist, 1999 |
.png) |
| Published analysis of Buenos Aires Eucharist, signed on March 26th, 2005 by Frederick Zugibe |
Miracle of Tixtala
A Eucharist transformation reportedly occurred in Tixtala, Mexico in 2006 that also was allegedly investigated scientifically. [21] Dr. Eduardo Sanchez, in a signed letter, claimed not only that the Mexican eucharist was a human heart, but that the blood excretions came from inside the host, rather than simply covering the Eucharist with blood, [22]
"The possibility of bleeding coming from the outside to the inside [of the host] is ruled out, since the histological structure that is shown and observed of the host presents various means of absorption, and these do not allow the entrance of the blood towards its interior confirming the first theory, that comes from the interior of the host"
Photographs of the Tixtala Eucharist are readily available, and Dr. Sanchez's letter discussing its microscopic properties can be found online.[23] Photographed tests on the host revealed that it, like other Eucharist miracles, was of the blood type AB.[24]; however, one test revealed that the blood belonged to a woman,[25] a rather strange conclusion if in fact this was the "body of Christ." Perhaps the religiously pious could argue that this is because Jesus was born of a virgin, and so He may lack the Y Chromosome in His blood needed from his father Joseph. Whether this explanation is ad hoc is up for debate, yet if this were the case why did other Eucharist blood samples not derive similar results?
The Miracle of Sokolka
Perhaps the most intriguing and best documented of these modern miracles would be the Eucharist in Sokółka, Poland. In October of 2008, during a mass a communion wafer was accidently dropped on the floor. As per custom, it was placed in a cup to dissolve. However, the wafer began to be covered in a blood-like substance, and an investigation was conducted. Samples were sent to two different scientists from the Medical University of Białystok to get independent analyses of the substance in question. Those conducting the study were Professor Maria Elżbieta Sobaniec-Łotowska and Professor Stanisław Sulkowski. They were not told where the sample had come from, and were subsequently surprised to learn about that it had originated from a communion wafer. The fact that the research was independent and that the researchers were unaware of the sample's origin was emphasized by inquisitors to diminish the possibility of bias or wishful thinking.
The results were similar to that of Lanciano: the sample was from a heart and had a similar blood type. However, this case was particularly unique to the the fact that the flesh was discovered to be intertwined to the bread; the blood had not merely been placed on the wafer, but it was coming from it as if the wafer itself was bleeding, and the cells of the bread were inseparable with those of the blood. Likewise, the heart did not appear to be from a dead body, but from a living person "in agony", ie enduring great stress or pain. Both professors who examined and photographed the Eucharist would summarize their findings in a co-authored article published by the Polish journal Teologia i Człowiek. [26] A (translated) lengthy excerpt from the article is published below, emphasis mine,[27]
"[The commission of the Church] investigate[d] the Eucharistic Event in Sokółka. The commission heard witnesses of the event, analyzed the whole event theological matter, drew up a protocol and conclusions from the protocol was presented to the public. All documentation remained then sent to the Apostolic Nunciature in Poland...Undoubtedly, the fragments of tissue observed under the microscope belong to the human heart and look as if a sample has been taken from the heart of a living man in agony...Pathomorphological research, in compliance with all the rules of art, carried out independently by two experts, employed by two separate organizational units of MUB [medical university], because science is subject to the principle of verifiability. What one discovers or observes scientists, it must be considered an objective fact if another scientist independently observes the same. The research results obtained by Prof. Maria E. Sobaniec-Latvia (from the Medical Pathomorphology Department of the Medical University of Bialystok) and by Prof. Stanisław Sulkowski (from the Department of Pathomorphology General UMB) are consistent and indicate the presence of human heart tissue...They both note that the matter of which the communicator is composed, in natural conditions, after when put into water, it dissolves quickly. This was not the case in the case under examination.
Instead, a more unusual phenomenon was observed: the heart tissue that appeared on the Communication was forming an unbreakable structure with a delicate hem left around the perimeter white host. This phenomenon is well visible even macroscopically, i.e. without the use of microscopic magnification. So found mutual penetration of the heart muscle fibers with the structure of the Communication. [Because of the] connections of muscle tissue with the host material, according to scientists, it excludes the possibility of human interference to artificially obtain such an effect.... Since the announcement of the Church Commission in October 2009, there has been no influence from the academic community substantive reservation as to the method of sampling, methodology the research carried out and the scientific credibility of the results of the expertise. It should therefore be assumed that - according to the noted testimony of many people - before October 19, 2008, the tested material consisted of particles of bread typical for communicants, while after that date in its structure contains a significant amount of tissue of the human heart muscle with characteristic morphology. One can therefore speak of a scientific confirmation of God's supernatural interference, which cannot be recreated in laboratory conditions or described with mathematical models."
My Doubts
While one can praise the careful scientific research that the Church puts into investigating miracle claims like the Eucharist transformations, one should admit that such methodology is not without its limits. The miracles are usually displayed in shrine in cathedrals, and so the Church is emphatic on keeping enough of the wafers in tact to display. The fact that communion wafers are usually very small in size means that there is a very limited amount to extract a sample from for scientific analysis. Likewise, Catholics regard the relics as sacred, and see any extensive tampering or sampling as disrespectful to the body of Christ. Thus, there are unfortunately only a handful of studies that can be done on the miraculous substance. Generally in science, peers will attempt to replicate and critique data they receive. The scientists who studied the Poland Eucharistic miracle expressed this view, "...science is subject to the principle of verifiability. What one discovers or observes scientists, it must be considered an objective fact if another scientist independently observes the same." Although there were multiple researchers independently analyzing the communion, one could always wish that we had more scientists to come and verify the results of these experiments. Science is about peer-review and cross checking of data; the reverence of the Eucharist entails that the bishops that oversee these relics are in no hurry to allow open examination to any curious scientist who may be less than accepting of the initial published reports.
The Church, in investigating healing miracles of canonization and Lourdes, typically require a panel of medical professionals, not just one or two scientists as is the case with these sorts of 'miracles'. [28] These physicians need not be affiliated with the Church or identify as Catholic; indeed, the Vatican is no stranger to seeking the professional advice of even non-religious scientists to supervise the process of investigation.Likewise with the investigations into the Shroud of Turin, to which much scrutiny and study has been given precisely because the Vatican allowed scientists of different backgrounds to study the object and publish their findings. We do not see this level of replication or cross-checking in the case of Eucharistic miracles, which are investigated on a local level rather than having any affiliation with the Vatican.
Why not engage in the same form of peer-review with these Eucharist miracles? And why are the vast majority of these findings not published in scientific journals? While medical verification is appreciated, every field can have its fringe theorists. Such is the very reason the review process exists: findings need to be checked and repeated by multiple people in the field attempting to falsify it, not just one or two academics whose testimonies we cannot cross-check. Such a scenario would be even better evidence than what we have at the moment. Due to the aforementioned limitations, we may have to be content with the data currently available.
Likewise, though I am unaware of any direct evidence debunking any of the Eucharist miracles mentioned in this text, there are a fair number of other examples where such claims of miraculous transformation turned out to be bogus. On occasion, "blood" that appears on an old wafer has turned out to be mold or fungi, [29] and other Eucharist miracles have not withstood proper scrutiny.[30] Skeptics have suggested fraud or theft, perhaps of a human heart from a medical lab, could account for miracles like Sokolka.[31] Admittedly, there is no hard evidence that the Eucharist samples are a result of grave robbing, yet in most cases there is no direct data that could falsify the fraud hypothesis either. And as for the alleged intertwinement of yeast and blood that "bleeds" from these miraculous wafers, is it possible that such interpretations are subjective and espoused by devout scientists who see what they want to see? Having several skeptical cardiologists verify this finding would be beyond helpful.
I am at a roadblock in regards to the theological implications to this miracle, if it in fact were demonstrable. It is my conviction that God would perform a miracle primarily for two conceivable reasons: 1) as a demonstration of answered prayer that entails an act of benevolence and mercy and/or 2) as vindication of a particular theological teaching or as vindication of a prophet. The former encompasses the vast majority of miracle claims, which almost always involve inexplicable recoveries from illness. The latter are far more exceptional and rare, involving things like Jesus's resurrection or Christ's ability to walk atop the Sea of Galilee. Neither of these are intrinsically acts of mercy, but rather are meant to substantiate Jesus of Nazareth as God Incarnate.
Eucharist miracles are obviously of this second category, and if they were legitimate it would be strong evidence for the doctrine of transubstantiation. And since the Roman Church is the sole affirmer of this particular doctrine, ipso facto a miracle of this nature would act as God's stamp of approval of Catholic authority and dogma. Yet in spite of this apparent pipeline for conversion to the Church of Rome, I have yet to see many Catholic apologists take up this mantel and argue for such miracles as evidence for the validity of their faith. [32] Is this, perhaps, because they too are hesitant to affirm a miracle with so many uncertainties entailed into it? Maybe they know something I don't.
And if Eucharist miracles are meant to be seals of vindication from Christ Himself, why do they happen to occur only in heavily Catholic contexts where parishioners are already enthusiastic in their belief? Would not a vindication miracle by its very nature occur for the purpose of converting, rather than acting as reinforcement for those already firm in their faith convictions? Christian miracles, both hisotrically and recently, are well-known for their ability to convert unbelievers in unevangelized areas, yet Eucharist miracles do not seem to hold this kind of conversion power. Hugh Farey, a well-known skeptic of Catholic relics, noted this point, [33]
"But a question that should be asked, I think, is what is a miracle for? A particular blessing on an individual might be one reason, or the demonstration of the sanctity of a putative saint might be another, but I'm a loss to see the point of eucharistic miracles, as they (nowadays) invariably occur within the context of the converted. The 'original' [Lanciano] if I recall correctly, occurred in the presence of disbelievers, who were thus converted. That would give it a purpose; but more recently they seem to be little more than status symbols, which raises doubts."
To conclude, Eucharistic miracles act as an interesting contribution to the theological literature surrounding debates on the Eucharist, though they serve better as an excursus than a full chapter. I for one reserve judgement on the matter, yet remain intrigued by the consistency and quantity of such miracles. I admit that I do not have a direct explanation to account for such phenomenon, but on the other side of the coin, there are enough features to allow my flags to be raised. Perhaps it is my Protestant bias, or maybe it is a skeptical intuition that may be on to something after all. Only time will tell. I will let the reader reach their own conclusions.
References
[1] Transcript of Harris's debate with Craig at the University of Notre Dame on April 7, 2011. http://www.mandm.org.nz/2011/05/transcript-sam-harris-v-william-lane-craig-debate-%E2%80%9Cis-good-from-god%E2%80%9D.html
[2] This is discussed in multiple publications: Varry, Dominica. "The Introduction of the Capuchins in Franche-Comté and the 'Miracle "of Faverney" in Around the Miracle of Faverney (1608): National Conference .2008; Marchal, Corinne and Manuel Tramaux. The Miracle of Faverney (1608). The Eucharist: Environment and Time of History. Franche-Comté University Press, 2010; and Gomez-Géraud, Marie Christine. "The Victory of the Body-God: Structures and Functions of Eucharistic Miracle Accounts in the Time of the Counter-Reformation." in The Miracle of Faverney (1608). 2010, pg. 311-326.
[3] Some point out that this length of time is significant, considering that Jesus is typically considered to have lived to the age of 33. The Catholic theology of the Eucharist being the body of Christ Himself acts as an interesting parallel to this number's importance.
[4] Aquinas, Summa Theologica III, 76.8 ad 2
[5] 'Eucharisitc Miracle of Chirattakonam' The Real Presence http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/english_pdf/Chirattakonam.pdf. I cannot help but be reminded of devotees who see the Virgin Mary appear on their toast; the depiction of an all too traditional European-looking Christ on an unleavened wafer is hardly remarkable enough to rule out parodelia.
[6] Serafini, Franco. Un Cardiologo Visita Gesù: I Miracoli Eucaristici Alla Prova Della Scienza. ESD Dominican Studio Editions. 2018.
[7] Though one cannot rule out this being a result of aging on the blood, contamination, among other factors. Some argue that the examinations of the blood from the wafers lacked proper controls to prevent antibodies from resembling AB blood. See Kearse, Kelly. "The Shroud of Turin, the Relics of Jesus, and Eucharistic Miracles: The Significance of Type AB Blood", who culminates that "the results of blood type AB for such miracles are inconclusive on several levels."
[8] The pained nature of the heart is stated in many of the examinations; Zugibe's statement described the Buenos Aires sample as "consistent with a recent heart attack" or a "severe blow to the chest over the heart." The Sokolka sample was described as being the "heart of a living man in agony."
[9] Gomez, Ricardo. Castañon Crónica De Un Milagro Eucarístico: Esplendor en Tixtla Chilpancingo, México. Grupo Internacional Para La Paz. 2014
[10] Giovannini, Renato. "The Eucharist Relics of Lanciano in Biological Research" SINDON no. 17. 1973: 30-33, esp. pg. 30.
[11] Nickell, Joe. Relics of the Christ. University Press of Kentucky, 2007, pg. 172. Costantino Sigismund in "Misure di Massa nel 1574 del Sangue del Miracolo Eucaristico di Lanciano." Gerbertvs, International Academic Publication on History of Medieval Science 9 (2016): 21-26, defends the original measurements provided from the 16th century analysis as being of equivalent weight.
[12] See Linoli, Odoardo. "Histological, Immunological and Biochemical Research on the Flesh and Blood of the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano". Quaderni Sclavo di Diagnostica, 1971. For an English translation of the article, see the following link: https://web.archive.org/web/20060831022730/http://www.negrisud.it/en/abruzzo/miracolo_eucaristico/tableofcontents.html
[13] Kearse, "Significance of Type AB Blood"
[14] Linoli, "Miracolo Eucaristico di Lanciano", pg. 671. Translated from Italian. Nickell in Relics of Christ pg.173 attempts to counter Linoli's judgement by calling it "subjective and overstated." While I can concur with Nickell that this argument would be stronger with more analysis should have been done on the substance, preferably by several independent scholars, Nickell's response here is far too brief. A more thorough lay out of the objection would have sufficed more handsomely.
[15] Sigismund, "Misure di Massa" pg. 25-26. The study also mentions a 1976 report from the World Health Organization, however I have been unable to find confirmation that such a report existed and have seen other sources refer to it as a hoax. In all likelihood, the WHO report is a forgery, as has been demonstrated by Serafini, Cardiologo.
[16] Tesoriero, Ron. Reason to Believe: A Personal Story. n.p. 2007 and Idem, Unseen New Evidence: The Origin of Life Under the Microscope. n.p. 2013.. See also Gomez, Castañon Crónica.
[17] Doctors purportedly consulted for these investigations included the following: Dr. Robert Lawrence (forensic histopathologist), Professor John Walker (University of Sydney) and Dr. Frederick Zugibe (Columbia University). See Gomez, Ricardo “Il est Vivant!” (He is Alive), found at the following site, https://emmanuel.info/en/the-eucharistic-miracle-in-buenos-aires/
[18] Zugibe's testimony is partially caught on film, see 7News Spotlight, "Science Investigates Signs of Jesus Christ". Youtube, March 30, 2021. https://youtu.be/mWmdXqIhjSs. The show originally aired on April 9, 2017. His convictions are not overtly clear, and other sources close to the doctor imply that he may have been at least partially misrepresented by the film crew. An organization centered around holy relics recently clarified that although Zugibe did analyze the slides of heart tissue presented to him, there was no confirmation or proof that in fact the slides had come from the Buenos Aires Eucharist; see International Crusade for Holy Relics, "Clarification". April 18, 2020. https://fb.watch/62ixYnNEfJ/
[19] The letter is shown in the following link, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zG2PPPGYnBQEjNEDpDXo9QbFUwnuRTg3/view?usp=sharing. The original document is derived from Ron Tesoriero's book.
[20] For photos of the DNA test results, see the 3:42 timestamp of the following video: The Joy of Faith, "Inspired By Carlos Acutis- Scientific Evidence for Eucharist Miracles." September 4, 2020. https://youtu.be/soCkftBBsBo
[21] Gomez, Castañon Crónica
[22] This quote is derived from a letter by Dr. Sanchez, which can be found at the 1:23 timestamp of "Inspired By Carlos Acutis"
[23] See the prior footnote for the citation of the letter. Photos of the host can derived from Gomez, Castañon Crónica
[24] "Inspired By Carlos Acutis", timestamp 3:49.
[25] This is the conclusion of Mike Willesee's documentary; see the 30 minute mark of 7News Spotlight, "Science Investigates Signs of Jesus Christ".
[26] Jacyna-Onyszkiewicz, Zbigniew & Sobaniec-Łotowska, Maria & Sulkowski, Stanisław & Kakareko, Andrzej & Rucki, Miroslaw. “Eucharistic Miracle From the Scientific Perspective.” Teologia I Człowiek. Vol 43. 2019: 81-98.
[27] Ibid, 87-88. Online there can be found an interview with the scientists who performed the analysis of the Sokolka eucharist; see the Catholic Association of Journalists, "We Saw the Heart in the Host From Sokółka." Katolickie, 2009. http://www.katolickie.media.pl/component/content/article/956-widzielismy-serce-w-hostii-z-sokolki
[28] For an analysis of the Church's in-depth treatment of assessing healing miracles, see Duffin, Jacalyn. Medical Miracles: Doctors, Saints, and Healing in the Modern World. Oxford University Press, 2009, who was herself an atheist physician recruited by the Vatican to blindly review a case of alleged healing at the intercession of Marguerite d'Youville. Healings at Lourdes are overseen by a medical bureau made up of roughly 30 doctors of various specializations, though they are considered an independent entity and have no affiliation with the Vatican.
[29] As one example, see Ferraro, 'Communion Host Turned Blood-red Due to Fungus, not Miracle'. Twin Cities Pioneer Press, Nov. 12, 2015. https://www.twincities.com/2011/12/13/archdiocese-communion-host-turned-blood-red-due-to-fungus-not-miracle/
[30] See Nickell, Joe "Eucharist 'Miracles" The Skeptical Inquirer 32, no. 3 May/June 2008.
[31] For example, in response to the Sokolka miracle, the Polish Rationalist Association suggested that a police report should be filed and that the possibility of theft of a human heart should be investigated.
[32] One exception being my acquaintance Matthieu Lavagna, whose French apologetic book Soyez Rationnel, Devenez Catholique, (Marie de Nazareth, 2022) incorporates Eucharist miracles as an argument for Catholicism.
[33] Hugh Farey, personal correspondence via email, January 28th, 2022.
No comments:
Post a Comment