Pope John Paul II Miracle

[Peter666]

Unfortunately, in 1983, JP II streamlined the process of canonization to a such a degree that we must question the authenticity of the current process.

One glaring error is the "canonization" of Fr. Escriva, founder of Opus Dei, who preached false ecumenism.
Another is the canonization of Sr. Faustina. While I don't know of the personal sanctity of this woman, her "writings" and the devotion it inspired were definitely condemned by the Catholic Church before JP II.

I would love to be the Devil's advocate in JP II's beatification process, but unfortunately he eliminated that position.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if JP2's so great, why couldn't he cure his own Parkinson's?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your question bears an eerie similarity to the taunts of the chief priests and scribes received by Jesus on the cross "He saved others but he can't save himself" (Mark 15:31)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, its similar to that, and to a whole bunch of other people too. Most of them were right, and the guy was just a fraud. You aren't suggesting that the chief priests error demonstrates that the question is erroneous, are you?

"People laughed at Galileo, and he was right, therefore my 3-in-1 Brain-protecting/Thought-magnifying/Bacon-crisping Helmet of Glory is clearly the greatest invention of all time!"

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously. However, this "miracle" is based on two rather important assumptions: a) that she actually had Parkinson's, and b) that she is indeed cured. Neither of which I can be convinced of simply by reading this article. I'd like to see the interview with the "astonished" neurologist, and read the findings of the Vatican inquiry.


[/ QUOTE ]
If her Parkinson's comes back, will the Pope's sainthood be revoked?

[Duke]

I don't like the word skepticism in this context, as it seems to imply that there is some grain of potential truth that is being scrutinized.

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
Thinking to statistics, the Church will much soon commit a Type I error (stating no miracle took place when one occurred) rather than a Type II error (proclaiming an event to be a miracle that turns out to be fraudulant).

[/ QUOTE ]

This would be a much more relevant point if, say, miracles actually existed.

[SBR]

[ QUOTE ]


The Church conducts a notoriously rigorous investigation of possible miracles and enters each investigation with the presumption that a miracle didn't happen. Thinking to statistics, the Church will much soon commit a Type I error (stating no miracle took place when one occurred) rather than a Type II error (proclaiming an event to be a miracle that turns out to be fraudulant).

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to be pithy but how rigorous can an investigation into medical facts be if the organization doing the investigation believes the earth is 6000 years old.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to be pithy but how rigorous can an investigation into medical facts be if the organization doing the investigation believes the earth is 6000 years old.

Post Extras



[/ QUOTE ]
Catholics believe in evolution, the big bang, etc.. They are less nutty then their protestant counterparts. ( I'm not even sure that all protestants believe in a young earth)

[Wubbie075]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if JP2's so great, why couldn't he cure his own Parkinson's?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your question bears an eerie similarity to the taunts of the chief priests and scribes received by Jesus on the cross "He saved others but he can't save himself" (Mark 15:31)

[/ QUOTE ]

Also eerily similar to the age old question.. "If psychics can see the future why don't they play the lottery?"

[Bigdaddydvo]

In light of the stunning lack of any meaningful analysis in this thread save one or two posts, I'll outline the possible conclusions that an impartial 3rd party would have to consider:

1) The nun never suffered from Parkinson's Disease, and thus could not possibly have been cured from something she never had in the first place. A comprehensive review of her medical records, along with thorough interviews with her doctors, would easily confirm or deny this possibility.

2) The Church, eager to capitalize on the "rock star" appeal of the late Pontiff, concocted the story to expedite the process of his cannonization and to appeal to believers. In this process, they persuaded the nun and her doctors to lie about her condition, and forged all relevant medical documentation to support the case that she'd been miraculously cured.

3) The nun suffered from Parkinson's Disease, and the disease went into spontaneous remission of its own accord.

4) Through the intersession of the late Pontiff, this nun was miraculously cured of Parkinson's disease.

In the end, I believe that either possibility #1 or #4 will turn out to be the case. I will leave it to the inquiry to conclude as to whether or not this nun's cure was miraculous or not. As I've said, Parkinson's disease is a degenerative nerve condition that, unlike some instances with cancer, does not simply fix itself or go into remission.

For those convinced that #2 is a certainty, consider the irreparable damage done to the Church if it is found to have faked a miracle. This is an intolerable risk given the number of people that must be involved, namely all of the nun's doctors, all of her fellow sisters, and not to mention the nun herself. A deliberate fake, given the circumstances, is unlikely for simply being too risky. Also to be considered is the grave sin against its own teachings that the Church would commit should it decide to fake a miracle.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
In light of the stunning lack of any meaningful analysis in this thread save one or two posts, I'll outline the possible conclusions that an impartial 3rd party would have to consider:

1) The nun never suffered from Parkinson's Disease, and thus could not possibly have been cured from something she never had in the first place. A comprehensive review of her medical records, along with thorough interviews with her doctors, would easily confirm or deny this possibility.

2) The Church, eager to capitalize on the "rock star" appeal of the late Pontiff, concocted the story to expedite the process of his cannonization and to appeal to believers. In this process, they persuaded the nun and her doctors to lie about her condition, and forged all relevant medical documentation to support the case that she'd been miraculously cured.

3) The nun suffered from Parkinson's Disease, and the disease went into spontaneous remission of its own accord.

4) Through the intersession of the late Pontiff, this nun was miraculously cured of Parkinson's disease.

In the end, I believe that either possibility #1 or #4 will turn out to be the case. I will leave it to the inquiry to conclude as to whether or not this nun's cure was miraculous or not. As I've said, Parkinson's disease is a degenerative nerve condition that, unlike some instances with cancer, does not simply fix itself or go into remission.

For those convinced that #2 is a certainty, consider the irreparable damage done to the Church if it is found to have faked a miracle. This is an intolerable risk given the number of people that must be involved, namely all of the nun's doctors, all of her fellow sisters, and not to mention the nun herself. A deliberate fake, given the circumstances, is unlikely for simply being too risky. Also to be considered is the grave sin against its own teachings that the Church would commit should it decide to fake a miracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if #4 is found to be the case, think of the irreparable damage to the church once people know the Pope has power to cure diseases but uses it only for one random case of Parkinson's.