Talk:Eucharistic miracle

message: This article has some grammatical and typographical errors. It is definitely not a Catholic Propaganda. Based on the facts and information presented, this article is incomplete and needs further sources. Scientific facts seemed to be accurate but need some more details.
------------------
This page appears to be Catholic Propaganda. The 'Eucharistic Miracle' is written about as fact. I would suggest that some controversy should be added to the article.
------------------
Sorry to tell you, but I do not agree with you that this is a Catholic Propaganda.  I believe that the facts that have been reported here are correct, as I have already searched and checked with other sites online, which totally agree to the "Eucharistic Miracle" content.  Thank you.
------------------
Sorry but I recently saw a NG documentary on this, the miracle is a FAKE. I'll try to look it up somewhere else, and bring back some real proof
------------------
This article has the makings of a great article, if only it was toned down from an assertion to a history of the claims. PhatJew 10:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, can you provide your sources also? That will help prevent your contributions from getting removed. And also, original synthesis is not accepted on Wikipedia, please see: WP:ORIGINAL SYN --Aronoel (talk) 23:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Dispute 

message: The text currently says "A Eucharistic miracle is an alleged miracle ...".  This is inaccurate.  The text should read "A Eucharistic miracle is a miracle ...".  The reason is that in order for something to be a miracle (Eucharistic or otherwise) it has to actually happen not just be alleged.  As the text currently reads it implies that the act of alleging a Eucharistic miracle makes it into a Eucharistic miracle.
I realize it is a subtle point so a parallel example would be "A murder is an alleged killing ..." which is clearly wrong.  An "alleged murder" is an "alleged killing" but a "murder" is just a "killing".  In the same way an "alleged Eucharistic miracle is an alleged miracle" but a "Eucharistic miracle" is a "miracle".
I will go ahead and make the appropriate edit, if you dispute that it can be further worked out here.  Mdmkolbe (talk) 03:25, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of "alleged" in definition 

message: There does seem to be a problem with material taken word-for-word from http://www.tldm.org/misc/HolyHour.htm.  What is the procedure for dealing with this? -- Cat Whisperer 19:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation 

message: In the main article, we find, among others, the following affirmation (supposedly based on the results of the exams performed in "1970-71, by Professor Odoardo Linoli, eminent Professor in Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy, and Professor Ruggero Bertelli of the University of Siena", who "conducted a scientific investigation into the miracle", and whose "report was published in Quaderni Sclavo di Diagnostica Clinica e di Laboratori in 1971, and reaffirmed by a scientific commission appointed by the Higher Council of the World Health Organization in 1973"):
* The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart, which would be impossible to obtain through dissection.
As I am not familiar with "Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy", I would like some expert to clarify why it "would be impossible to obtain through dissection" the "muscular tissue of the heart" into which apparently the Host was miraculously transformed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Miguel de Servet (talk • contribs) 14:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The miracle of Lanciano 

message: Despite believing this miracle to be one of the most remarkable, I would like to see a sceptical response. The article seems to suggest that none exists: this seems unlikely. Also, is there evidence the flesh could not be obtained by dissection? Jamesblythe 21:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the radiocarbon dating indicated the Shroud is much younger than 2000 years.  However, there are alternative explanations.  One is that a large percentage of the mass of the shroud consists of living bacteria.  Another is that it was washed in oil at some point.  In any case, that has no bearing on the authenticity of the miracle of Lanciano.  Vegasprof (talk) 20:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The miracle of Lanciano (II) 

message: Hi everyone. I think there should be a section on Eucharistic miracles in other Church traditions if any have ever been reported.  --PaladinWriter (talk) 08:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eucharistic Miracles In Other Church Traditions 

message: Hi all,
There's a detailed paper on the miracle by Bruno Sammaciccia, called "il miracolo eucaristico di Lanciano" published in 1977. A french version is available online ( http://www.christ-roi.net/index.php/Le_miracle_eucharistique_de_Lanciano_(Bruno_Sammaciccia) ) , and I've added this reference to the bibliography. Perhaps a physician or biologist should look at this. For my part, I find the evidence convincing enough.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guardaiinalto (talk • contribs) 03:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  paper by Sammaciccia 

message: Look at the French or the Polish articles : there has been something very interesting in Buenos Aires.
There is a video in Spanish with text in English ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbg_dhI4XCs  --Plijno (talk) 23:03, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only that: There happened another one in Poland in 2008, see here or here! This really should be added!--Der Spion (talk) 12:45, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very important : Buenos Aires 1996 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Eucharistic miracle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=70440
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110102131821/http://www.zenit.org/article-12933?l=english to http://www.zenit.org/article-12933?l=english
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Isn't it time someone added Legnitz? See for example here (and all over some bits of the internet):
https://thecatholictravelguide.com/destinations/poland/legnica-poland-eucharistic-miracle-st-jack-church-st-hyacinth/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.236.40.77 (talk) 15:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legnitz / Legnica? 

message: I was surprised that no debunking views are provided. There should be a critical response section by scientists. ````  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChessisArt (talk • contribs) 22:22, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sort of against "debunking" any religion. I haven't gone very deep into this article and don't plan to, but miracles should IMHO be neutrally explained as something that some people believe, without endorsing that belief. My guess would be that no debunking has been linked to because none exists. I doubt it is even a question, even for the most ardent of the faithful, whether or not a communion wafer *really* becomes human flesh. From the scientific point of view it's a priori ridiculous. Elinruby (talk) 07:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ron Tesoriero lawyer and documentarist make a video documentary about Eucharistic Miracle of Buenos Aires happened in 1992-1996 studied by prof Frederick Zugibe, prof Robert Lawrence and prof Odoardo Linoli that confirmed the phenomenon. Also you can read the book of Italian doctor Franco Serafini that studied eucharistic miracles of Lanciano, Buenos Aires, Tixtla in Messico, Sokolka & Legnica in Poland. 80.183.112.61 (talk) 16:50, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no Critical Scientific evaluations? 

message: i left this alone, but dislike the capitalization of "Host". Yet "host" is such a common word it may be necessary. Isn't there a better English equivalent for the French ? Elinruby (talk) 01:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: (After some googling) how do people feel about "wafer"? Elinruby (talk) 01:24, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  MoS re host vs Host