by Marco Corvaglia
§ 1. Unscientific Sensationalism
Sometimes, the supporters of these apparitions go scavenging for cases of alleged miraculous healings connected with Medjugorje, which can then be presented at the many meetings of devotees or on usually uncritical TV shows.
Instead, the most qualified researchers do not resort to sensationalism and know that the possible healings, in themselves, cannot prove anything.
Dr. Claude Kenesi, Professor at the Faculty of Medicine in Paris and member of the Lourdes International Medical Committee (LIMC), treats this problem with prudence and honesty. Let us see why.
Each year, Lourdes receives about five million pilgrims, seventy thousand of whom are sick.
[Claude Kenesi, Les guérisons de Lourdes peuvent-elles être expliquées médicalement ? in VV.AA., Les guérisons inexpliquées sont-elles miraculeuses ?, Les Éditions de l'Atelier, Ivry-sur-Seine, 2009, p. 99]
If a sick person believes he has been healed at Lourdes, he presents a declaration to the Medical Bureau, which previously examines the case.
Then the documentation is analysed by the Lourdes International Medical Committee, made up of some twenty members appointed by the Bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes:
Membership in the Christian religion is not mandatory. But, in fact, members of the Committee at present are all practicing Catholics.
[Ibid., p. 102]
The Committee chooses a reporting member from within itself who is a specialist in the disease at issue and charged with studying the dossier. [...] Once the investigation is complete the report is submitted to all members of the Committee where it will inform the decision of the LIMC.
[Yves Chiron, Inchiesta sui miracoli di Lourdes, Lindau, Turin, 2006, p. 88]
To say that, on the basis of our present knowledge, a healing is exceptional, a secret ballot (with a majority of two thirds) is needed.
[Kenesi, Les guérisons de Lourdes peuvent-elles être expliquées médicalement ? in VV.AA., Les guérisons inexpliquées sont-elles miraculeuses ?, pp. 103-104]
By the way, no healing of Medjugorje was ever analysed using this protocol. However Professor Kenesi continues:
In Committee, we so often hear this phrase: "Do you guarantee one hundred percent that this is a miracle?" The answer is: "Absolutely not."
Despite the seriousness of our work, the redoubling of tests, the long duration of observation, some uncertainty still persists. Our role, in LIMC, is to make it as small as possible. But we do not reduce it to zero. This is an admission of ignorance on our part. We do not claim to know everything, nor do we to explain everything one hundred percent. It is typical of all human affairs. And I am happy as this uncertainty is the space of freedom left to each of us.
[Ibid., p. 107]
Dr. Patrick Theillier, he too a member of the LIMC, answers the question "Can you prove a cure is unexplainable?" this way:
Prove? No. Medicine isn't an exact science, and its results vary with individuals. All we can do is arrive at a majority opinion, through our innermost convictions.
[Patrick Theillier, Talking about Miracles, Redemptorist Pubblications, Chawton, 2004, p. 81]
This explains why, within the LIMC, only a two-thirds majority, not unanimity, is required in order to say that a healing is exceptional: physicians are aware that that they can not, in any case, give an absolute certainty. Their findings are only an opinion, although qualified (then a second, theological, evaluation is required for the healing to be proclaimed as miraculous by the Church).
A similar situation occurs when it comes to the evalution of the healings attributed to the saints during the canonization process. The President of the Consulta Medica at the Congregation for Saints’ Causes, Dr. Patrizio Polisca, interviewed by the Catholic journalist John Thavis, highlighted it:
The Consulta Medica does not ask from science an absolute judgement on a miracle--that’s not the role of medical experts, Polisca explained. In fact, it does not insist on an unanimous decision by its seven members; a majority of five positive votes is enough to move a miracle forward.
[John Thavis, The Vatican Prophecies. Investigating Supernatural Signs, Apparitions and Miracles in the Modern Age, Viking, New York, 2015, p. 189]
Dr. Theillier observes also the following:
A patient can only recover from a curable disease. The miracle does not force nature. We have never seen a person suffering from Down syndrome cured in Lourdes! Ultimately, what I call a miracle may be qualified in medicine as "spontaneous remission." For my part, I believe that the miracle uses the ways of nature, but by means that are not yet known to medicine.
[Statement of Dr. Patrick Theillier in : Xavier Ternisien, Le dernier miraculé de Lourdes, "Le Monde", 21 December 2002]
The disparity of views among doctors can be very deep and the opinion of one or more of them cannot be automatically regarded as the opinion of the scientific community as a whole.
For example, in 2013, during the process of canonization of John Paul II, the Vatican Consulta Medica recognised as inexplicable the healing of a woman from Costa Rica, Floribeth Mora Diaz, who had been diagnosed with an aneurysm of the right cerebral artery and hemorrhage at the Calderón Guardia Hospital in San José.
Other doctors, however, argued that the healing could be attribute to a spontaneous thrombosis of the aneurysm (i.e., the formation of a blood clot within the dilated artery).
Le quotidien du médecin of 24 July 2013 reads:
According to the postulator of the cause, Msgr. Slawomir Oder, "the Cartesian rigour" by which clinical data were examined and the ecclesiastical investigation conducted by the local bishop made it possible to conclude that it was a miracle. In France, Catholic doctors are more cautious. [...] Prof. Louis Puybasset, head of the neurointensive surgical service at the Pitié-Salpetriere hospital (Paris) [...] contests the finding of Dr. Alejandro Roman Vargas, neurosurgeon at the Calderon hospital, according to whom the traces of the aneurysm had disappeared "without any scientific explanation": "Cases of spontaneous thrombosis of intracranial aneurysms are documented", says Prof. Puybasset, who warns against "drifting towards magical thinking“.
[Questions sur une deuxième « guérison inexpliquée » attribuée à Jean-Paul II, by Christian Delahaye, "Lequotidiendumedecin.fr", 24/07/2013]
Speaking of Sister Marie Simon-Pierre’s recovery from Parkinson's disease (that can be subject to misdiagnosis) - recognised as inexplicable by the Consulta Medica in 2010 (during the John Paul II's beatification process) - Dr. Polisca expressed himself as follows:
We consulted the best Parkinson's experts in the field, and they gave their best judgement. But it can never be an absolute judgement, because medicine is always evolving.
[Thavis, The Vatican Prophecies, p. 191]
So far, 69 Lourdes healings have been proclaimed as miraculous by the Church. 62 of these proclamations occurred by the year 1965: apparently, the level of scientific knowledge has a strong influence on the proclamations of miracles.
Dr. André Trifaud, former professor at the Faculty of Medicine in Marseilles and, like Prof. Kenesi, member of the Lourdes International Medical Committee, goes into this aspect:
Regarding the medical sciences, until the first half of the twentieth century we could base ourselves on certainties inaccessible to doubt and overlook the possibility that the puzzle posed by a recovery was interpreted as a lack of scientific knowledge.
It has been necessary to definitely turn a page: the one that wanted to bind the recognition of a miraculous cure to a conclusive scientific certainty.
As a matter of fact, the accelerated evolution of scientific knowledge unceasingly gives rise to puzzles that follow one other as each answer raises a new question.
The vocabulary of medical conclusions change. We no longer speak of healing "contrary to natural laws." They only become "unusual", "unforeseeable", "inexplicable" and also "unexplainable on the basis of current medical knowledge." [...]
I think it is not useless to explain this concept with some examples that I chose in oncogenesis because it is one of the fields in which, in recent years, advances have been more spectacular. [...]
Since the first research of Quirin in 1921, we are aware of rare, but not exceptional, spontaneous healings of neuroblastomas (malignant pararenal tumors of embryonic origin). These regressions, even in cases with bone and hepatic metastases, occur in approximately 2-3% of cases, mostly in infants before six months.
The mechanism of this spontaneous healing was, until very recently, completely unexplained. [...]
What could have been the conclusion of a medical examination if such an enigmatic healing had been produced at Lourdes before its natural causes were highlighted? [...]
Nowadays there are no more doubts about the fact that many spontaneous healings from cancer have a natural origin. [...]
As a child I was taught that the miracle can not be "coercive".
[André Trifaud, Les énigmes scientifiques des guérisons miraculeuses, in Guérisons et miracles. Rapports du Congrès International de Lourdes, 22, 23 et 24 octobre 1993, Centre Catholique des Médecins Français e Association Médicale Internationale de Lourdes, Alençon, 1994, pp. 65-68]
Also Prof. Charles Chassagnon of the Lourdes International Medical Committee, wrote of "great difficulties in saying that a cure is inexplicable from the medical point of view, given the existing studies on spontaneous recovery from cancer and other malignant processes, the influence of psychological factors, even in diseases markedly organic, and the limits of current scientific knowledge "[F. Alonso Fernandez, Estigmas, levitaciones y extasis, Ediciones Temas de Hoy, Madrid, 1993, p. 11. The reference is to Ch. Chassagnon, "Les miracles de Lourdes", Psychologie Médicale, 1988, 20, 5, pp. 653-656].
It is needless to add comments on sidereal distance that separates this objective, fair and scientifically founded vision of the matter from sensationalism on which television, popular press and propagandists play.
§ 2. The Others' Miracles
In ancient Greece there were several temples of the god Asclepius, where the sick confidently used to go and where, as far as we know, sometimes they were healed in a seemingly miraculous way. But, to come to the present day, if it were possible to infer, from an healing occurred in Medjugorje, that the apparitions are true, then one should apply the same logic to those healings that occur, for instance, in Muslim culture, in places where sick people flow.
Muslims ascribe several miraculous healings to the waters of the Zamzam well in La Mecca. In Mashad, Iran, the archives of the mosque dedicated to Imam Reza (eighth direct descendant of Ali, cousin of Mohammad) contain records of miraculous healing that span one hundred years, and are accompanied by certified medical documentation. Another mosque that contains documented records of healings is that of Jamkaran, in Qum, also in Iran.
For instance, the female writer Leila Lahlou lived in Casablanca, Morocco, with her husband Abdelmalek Lahlou and two sons, Nadia and Karim. She was diagnosed with breast cancer that had metastatized to her lungs. The severe diagnosis was confirmed in Brussels, Belgium, by oncologists Drs. Tagnon and Vokaer (Brugmann University Hospital) and in Paris, Avicenne Hospital, by Dr. Israël [Cf. F. Malti-Douglas, Medicines of the Soul, University of California Press, 2001, pp. 84-85, 206 n. 27 and 39].
She decided along with her husband to make the humra, ie the so-called "small pilgrimage" to Mecca.
On the small pilgrimage, Leila follows for four days an ascetic regimen in which her daily intake consists of nothing but some bread, an egg, and holy water from Zamzam.
[Fedwa Malti-Douglas, Medicines of the Soul, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 2001, p. 97]
On the fifth day, she discovered that the lumps in her body had disappeared. Leila came back to the European physicians:
The examinations were all negative, a fact that leaves the physicians confused and surprised.
[Ibid., p. 82]
In the following months, however, the disease recurred severely. One night Leila dreamed of Muhammad healing her. She woke up and was feeling well again. She was healed. Leila presented the account of the facts and the medical records in a book published in two versions: Arabic and French (Falâ Tansa Allâh, Matba'at al-Najâh al-Jadîda, Casablanca, 1984; N'oublie pas Dieu, Imprimerie Najah El Jadida, Casablanca, 1987).
Leila Lahlou would die of intestinal cancer in 1991, almost a decade after the above accounted facts [Cf. Malti-Douglas, Medicines of the Soul, p.118].
About Spontaneous Remissions...
Spontaneous (and inexplicable on the basis of current medical knowledge) remissions are well know in certain diseases, even serious.
For example, In the case of multiple sclerosis, spontaneous remission is quite common: about 20 per cent of the patients suffer from its benign form, which heals completely, while another 25 per cent suffer from the form called "remitting" that recurs even after years [Cf. Jürg Kesselring, Multiple Sklerose, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, 1993, p. 242 and Clive P. Hawkins, Jerry S. Wolinsky, Principles of Treatments in Multiple Sclerosis, Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, 2000, p. 324].
Besides, immune system’s dynamics and psychosomatic reactions are still not fully understood. In 1996 Roger Pilon, M.D., at that time director of Lourdes’ Medical Bureau, wrote:
Psychosomatics is far from having revealed all of its complexity. Currently, it provides attractive explanations for certain surprising healings.
[Roger Pilon, Le miracle, un don de Dieu, ("The Miracle, a Gift From God"), Lourdes Magazine, 53, 1996, p. 11]
The somatization of psychological problems deserves a separate mention.
According to the DSM-5 (the reference manual for psychiatrists from around the world) the so-called "conversion disorder" can cause paralysis and blindness of psychological origin.
Dr. Caryle Hischberg, director of the Remission Project at the Institute of Noetic Science, in her classic book Remarkable Recovery noticed:
There are no medical publications devoted to the study of extraordinary recoveries, […] there is no national database to register unexplained recoveries. We don’t know how often they occur. […]
It has been estimated that only ten percent of the remarkable recoveries is reported to specialist journals, and this is probably a conservative estimate.
[C. Hirshberg, M. I. Barasch, Guarigioni straordinarie (original title: "Remarkable Recoveries") Mondadori, Milan, 1995, pp. 17-27, passim]
In their 1993 book Spontaneous Remission. An Annotated Bibliography, coauthored with Dr. Brendan O’Reagan, Dr. Hirschberg gave this explanation for the insufficient attention that the scientific world had paid to spontaneous remissions:
Remission is often regarded as an artifact created by the misdiagnosis of the patient’s condition.
Remission does not lend itself to research since it is usually seen after the fact, presumably leaving no traces of how it occurred.
[C. Hirshberg, B. O'Reagan, Spontaneous Remission. An Annotated Bibliography, Institute of Noetic Sciences, Petaluma, CA, 1993, p. 4]
In the very same volume the two authors collected the available references about many spontaneous remissions, reported in 800 scientific journal around the world.
The book can be freely consulted by downloading its individual chapters as PDF files by clicking on these links:
Table of Contents
Introduction: Pages 1-52
Chapter 1: Pages 53-58 - Remission of Neoplasms of Lip, Oral Cavity, and Pharynx
Chapter 2: Pages 59-92 - Remission of Neoplasms of Digestive Organs and Peritoneum
Chapter 3: Pages 93-111 - Remission of Neoplasms of Respiratory and Intrathoracic Organs
Chapter 4: Pages 112-142 - Remission of Neoplasms of Bone, Connective Tissue, and Soft Tissue
Chapter 5: Pages 143-166 - Remission of Neoplasms of the Female Breast
Chapter 6: Pages 167-197 - Remission of Neoplasms of the Skin
Chapter 7: Pages 198-219 - Remission of Neuroblastoma
Chapter 8: Pages 220-288 - Remission of Neoplasms of Genitourinary Organs
Chapter 9: Pages 289-309 - Remission of Neoplasms of the Eye, Brain, Nervous System, and Endocrine Glands
Chapter 10: Pages 310-348 - Remission of Neoplasms of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Tissue
Chapter 11: Pages 349-379 - Remission of Infectious and Parasitic Diseases
Chapter 12: Pages 380-408 - Remission of Endocrine, Nutritional and Metabolic Diseases, and Immunity Disorders
Chapter 13: Pages 409-440 - Remission of Diseases of the Circulatory System, Blood, and Blood Forming Organs
Chapter 14: Pages 441-454 - Remission of Nervous System, Sense Organs, and Mental Disorders
Chapter 15: Pages 455-460 - Remission of Respiratory System Diseases
Chapter 16: Pages 461-475 - Remission of Digestive System Diseases
Chapter 17: Pages 476-487 - Remission of Genitourinary System, and Pregnancy and Childbirth Related Disorders
Chapter 18: Pages 488-495 - Remission of Diseases of the Skin, Subcutaneous Tissue, Musculoskeletal System, and Connective Tissue
Chapter 19: Pages 496-502 - Remission of Injury Related Disorders
Appendix One: Pages 503-530 - Review Articles
Appendix Two: Pages 531-558 - Behavioral Aspects of Remission
Appendix Three: Pages 559-576 - Clinical and Experimental Studies
Appendix Four: Pages 577-646 - Infection Related Remission
Addendum: Pages 647-674
Index: Pages 675-694
Author Index: Pages 695-703
Journal Index: Pages 704-713
Updated on 26 March 2017