Italy's Padre Pio 'faked his stigmata with acid'

The Other Christ: Padre Pio and 19th Century Italy, by the historian Sergio Luzzatto, draws on a document found in the Vatican's archive.

The document reveals the testimony of a pharmacist who said that the young Padre Pio bought four grams of carbolic acid in 1919.

"I was an admirer of Padre Pio and I met him for the first time on 31 July 1919," wrote Maria De Vito.

She claimed to have spent a month with the priest in the southern town of San Giovanni Rotondo, seeing him often.

"Padre Pio called me to him in complete secrecy and telling me not to tell his fellow brothers, he gave me personally an empty bottle, and asked if I would act as a chauffeur to transport it back from Foggia to San Giovanni Rotondo with four grams of pure carbolic acid.

"He explained that the acid was for disinfecting syringes for injections. He also asked for other things, such as Valda pastilles."

The testimony was originally presented to the Vatican by the Archbishop of Manfredonia, Pasquale Gagliardi, as proof that Padre Pio caused his own stigmata with acid.

It was examined by the Holy See during the beatification process of Padre Pio and apparently dismissed.

Padre Pio, whose real name was Francesco Forgione, died in 1968. He was made a saint in 2002. A recent survey in Italy showed that more people prayed to him than to Jesus or the Virgin Mary. He exhibited stigmata throughout his life, starting in 1911.

The new allegations were greeted with an instant dismissal from his supporters. The Catholic Anti-Defamation League said Mr Luzzatto was a liar and was "spreading anti-Catholic libels".

Pietro Siffi, the president of the League, said: "We would like to remind Mr Luzzatto that according to Catholic doctrine, canonisation carries with it papal infallibility.

"We would like to suggest to Mr Luzzatto that he dedicates his energies to studying religion properly."

...because HarleyD and many of the others, are doing what looks to them like defending God's honor against li'l ol' us.

Oops...just a point of clarification.

HarleyD, or any one else for that matter, cannot defend God's honor. I cannot convince people or change their minds. God is perfectly capable of defending that Himself and He is in the change management business. All God asks of us is to simply be true to His word. If we "feel" we have been, then I would suggest something a tad more concrete.

Personally, I believe the Bible teaches that all who die in Christ Jesus are in the same situation as the Apostle Paul who said that he longed to depart and be with the Lord.

I agree. :-)

Maybe we are talking across each other over some fine point neither is seeing.

The passages in Revelation demonstrate that the dead in Christ are aware, in heaven, and with the Lord.

My only point from the beginning is that they were all dead at one time. Thus they are not alive. We are told not to:

Deut. 18:11 ...or one who calls up the dead.

You said, if they pray to someone in heaven through GOD it was okay. I was making the point that in no short order God gets dropped from the equation and that's how some of this Mary stuff probably got started.

Am I missing a point you are trying to get across to Me? I value your insights.

You don’t like my name?

I like the Warhammer series. I thought the Grudgebringers were cool. I have had many names on Freerepublic (Federalist, Cpt Gideon)but I always forget my password and have changed emails so often I can’t log in so I created a new account. I have been coming to the site for a long time. If you question my political leanings, I use the same handle on the forums on the Nashuatelegraph.com. I also used CptRepublican as a handle there too. Read my posts. I am as conservative as you can get. I am as Catholic as you can get as well.

I guess what you and I share is a suspicion of "feelings", at least when used as a basis for a proposition instead of merely information of an ambiguous nature.

So if we put up a thread about a charge that Padre Pio was faking it, what is the purpose (if I may ask) of calling into question many aspects of Catholic piety having to do with saints and their intercession if it is not to defend the truth, somehow? (I was speaking loosely about "honor") Why not let chattering dogs chatter?

I only get into these threads in a contentious way when what looks like a fallacious argument or a falsehood is used to attack Catholic dogma. I remember once particpating in a Protestant thread about whether the notions of predestination and election made one lazy. It seemed to me to be an open question, and I didn't attack or pick at the ideas. I did say that I did NOT think they would make one lazy. I think they'd be energizing, usually.

But let us say in an open thread something positive about the BVM and her intercession and it seems that half the time we'll end up being told that it's all so Rome can make money and control us and because we hate sex.

What do you think that's about?

I don't think any of us Protestants are saying God doesn't communicate with his saints in heaven.

Therefore, if I say to my Heavenly Father in prayer, "Dear Lord, let my grandpa know that I love him.", then I think that God CAN do that, and that He probably will do that.

I think if your grandpa is in heaven, he already knows you love him. There's no need at all for you to tell him that from his perspective. If it makes you feel better to speak to your grandpa in heaven, go ahead. I sometimes say something to my dad, and I have every confidence somehow he already knows my heart.

But none of that is by way of asking a saint in heaven to intercede for us with God and thus try to alter our relationship with God, which is what Catholics are doing when they pray to saints and ask them to become real intermediators between themselves and God.

Which is blasphemous.

Do you think the good will of your grandpa in heaven will change God's view of you? Does God not already know how your grandpa feels? In fact, wasn't it God who gave your grandpa's love to you in the first place?

You really should read what I wrote, and quit reading beyond what I wrote.

I think there is communication in heaven among those who reside there. I think angels are alive. I think our departed brethren are alive. God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

I think there is communication between me and the Lord.

You take it any farther than that, and you’ve left what I’ve actually said and have gone into what I haven’t said.

God is perfectly capable of defending that Himself and He is in the change management business. All God asks of us is to simply be true to His word.

Amen. I'm sending these verses to my children...

"My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments:
For length of days, and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee.
Let not mercy and truth forsake thee: bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart:
So shalt thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and man.
Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding...
My son, let not them depart from thine eyes: keep sound wisdom and discretion:
So shall they be life unto thy soul, and grace to thy neck.
Then shalt thou walk in thy way safely, and thy foot shall not stumble.
When thou liest down, thou shalt not be afraid: yea, thou shalt lie down, and thy sleep shall be sweet.
Be not afraid of sudden fear, neither of the desolation of the wicked, when it cometh.
For the LORD shall be thy confidence, and shall keep thy foot from being taken." -- Proverbs 3:1-5;21-26

God planned for us to have these types of discussions simply so that we can distinguish the truth from untruth. We are to search things out.

I get into these discussions because it bothers me that people don't carefully read what is written in front of them. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing more valuable to God than His word. The longest Psalms in scripture (119) is devoted entirely to the word of God. Our Lord Jesus was the WORD incarnate. And until I became a Calvinist I couldn't figure out half of the things the scriptures were talking about simply because I was reading the scriptures the WRONG way. I appreciate people telling me where I'm wrong because I would like to take an honest look at it, compare it to scripture and see if I'm wrong.

Each of us are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, not hugs and kisses. People are free to ignore me-many do. But I would caution people that they need to take a real honest look at what the scriptures are saying in light of their own theological viewpoint.

Funny, I thought ps 119 was about the law. There's either a word like "law" or "commandment" or a figurative synonym like "word" in every verse.

But the nub of the problem, of course, is that while you and I agree, pretty much about "feelings", and hugs and kisses, pretty much, we disagree fundamentally about the place of the Bible in establishing doctrine. We find in the Bible a basis for our opinion, and you do for yours. And if we're going to talk about a "great gulf", that's where I think it is.

To some, the behavior of the Bereans evidently seems like a clear-cut proof of Sola Scriptura. I just don't see it. What I CAN see is that IF one posits Sola Scriptura, THEN one can see the Bereans that way. (and if one doesn't, one doesn't.) And, of course, I think I TOOK a "real, honest", and protracted (more than 22 years) look at Scripture, and became a Catholic.

I don't think the wild accusations I have seen on either side contribute to a process of searching things out any more than fancy type-faces and perseveration, so if you are right about God's plan, I think these behaviors work against it.

Thank you for your reply and for sharing your insights!

As for “to God be glory, not man”: if that is meant as a criticism of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception or of this claim about J the B, I’m astonished. You know, or should know, that we think these things are entirely by God’s power and grace, and not man’s doing at all. It’s not, in the first consideration, that Mary and J the B are such swell people. It’s that God is a remarkably and always surprisingly swell (to use the theological term) God, and they are recipients of remarkably swell gifts. That Mary and J the B are swell afterwards is God’s doing.

As you probably already know, I personally eschew all the doctrines and traditions of men across the board - so doctrines such as the Immaculate Conception of Mary and sinlessness in John the Baptist have no currency with me.

If you are led of the Spirit to embrace such doctrines and traditions, then that is what you must do.

I am led by God the Father's revelations in 1) Jesus Christ His only begotten Son, 2) the indwelling Holy Spirit, 3) the Scriptures which the Spirit has personally authenticated and 4) the Creation both spiritual and physical.

And I too will do as the Spirit leads me. (Romans 8, John 15-17 et al)

On the other point, my declaration "To God be the glory, not man." - agrees with the Great Commandment.

The second commandment is not the Great Commandment.

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment.

And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. – Matt 22:37-40

If we keep these two commandments, the rest is just details - hence the importance of keeping the priorities.

There is only one Great Commandment.

The same message of priorities appears throughout Scripture, though I am particularly fond of Revelation chapters four and five.

So again I say:

To God be the glory, not man.

If we keep these two commandments, the rest is just details - hence the importance of keeping the priorities. There is only one Great Commandment.

Amen, Alamo-Girl! Only one.

"And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:
And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.
And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes.
And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates...
Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people which are round about you;
(For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.
Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God" -- Deuteronomy 6:5-9;14-16

"But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." -- Matthew 12:48-50

God planned for us to have these types of discussions simply so that we can distinguish the truth from untruth. We are to search things out. I get into these discussions because it bothers me that people don't carefully read what is written in front of them. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing more valuable to God than His word. The longest Psalms in scripture (119) is devoted entirely to the word of God. Our Lord Jesus was the WORD incarnate.

Amen, Harley!

"Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word...
Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee...
I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget thy word.
Deal bountifully with thy servant, that I may live, and keep thy word...
My soul cleaveth unto the dust: quicken thou me according to thy word...
So shall I have wherewith to answer him that reproacheth me: for I trust in thy word." -- Psalm 119:9,11,16-17,25,42

To some, the behavior of the Bereans evidently seems like a clear-cut proof of Sola Scriptura. I just don't see it....so if you are right about God's plan, I think these behaviors work against it.

I don't wish to sound preachy but for a while I had part of Ezra 3:13 as my tagline. The text of Ezra is:

Ezr 3:11 And they sang together by course in praising and giving thanks unto the LORD; because [he is] good, for his mercy [endureth] for ever toward Israel. And all the people shouted with a great shout, when they praised the LORD, because the foundation of the house of the LORD was laid.
Ezr 3:12 But many of the priests and Levites and chief of the fathers, [who were] ancient men, that had seen the first house, when the foundation of this house was laid before their eyes, wept with a loud voice; and many shouted aloud for joy:
Ezr 3:13 So that the people could not discern the noise of the shout of joy from the noise of the weeping of the people: for the people shouted with a loud shout, and the noise was heard afar off.

Most people (and commentators) read this as there were those who could not see what God was doing in peoples' lives. Consequently those who were mourning were focus on things of the past.

I believe this is a misinterpretation. Those ancient fathers who had seen the first temple knew the glory and majesty represented by that first temple. What they saw in front of them in the second temple was a cheap imitation version and they wept. Sure God was working in the people's lives and people were singing songs and having a good time; but the people truly didn't understand the lost they suffered. They didn't remember the glory and majestic of their former temple. The crying of those who did remember could not be heard over the joy, the praising and the giving of thanks. What God had given the people was a diminished version of His glory.

Call me Mr. Sourpuss but there is much truth in this. Christianity has moved on to the second temple. We sing for joy when we should be weeping at what we have lost. We no longer see the beauty and majesty of God's gospel, replacing it with substandard products like pageantry, councils, and bumper stickers. And we're happy.

Psa 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Sorry friend, frank discussions about the scriptures over the precepts of man do not work against us. They are simply a call reminding people of what we are losing.

I agree, in large part.

I disagree, as you know, that the Immaculate conception is one of the "doctrines and traditions of men". My comment was conditional, thus: "If that is meant as a criticism ..." (with the accent on the 'if'.)

My subsidiary point was that doctrine, as articulated, obeys the injunction to give God the glory, and proclaims, as we understand it, one of the examples of His gloriousness.

I enthusiastically pray the Non nobis(Ps 115).

Okay, I'm getting a concept that, from your POV (and that of some of the cheering peanut gallery), the motivation is not what I would call a discussion seeking understanding, but a proclamation among the heathen of the truth, "and let God sort them out."

So, in support of this conjecture: When I go after an argument, I am tend to be looking for errors in fact (It is said we teach "A", while my understanding is that we do not) or logic (Since some pray to saints, therefore they must think the NEED to pray to saints), among which are internal contradictions or absurdities (no examples come to mind). You on the other hand will consider the mission mostly accomplished merely by clearly articulating the "correct" doctrine.

We're trying to do two different things. So when you mount an assault on our notions of the intercessions of the Saints, any related criticism is relevant. So that if you raise the question of "Why not go straight to Jesus?" and I answer that Protestants also ask for the prayers of others, you think it germane to bring up, say, the "prayers to the dead" criticism, because the goal is to stomp into the dirt the whole idea of intercession of the saints. While for me, the manner of stomping, the truth, reasonableness, and efficacy of it is what needs examining, and since we're not done looking at the question of intercession generally, the bringing up of the 'dead' question is a just changing the subject and looks evasive.

So when your side is done mentioning this or that point and hauling out this or that piece of Scripture or Calvin, you all Amen and generally high-five each other. And we're thinking and sometimes saying, "Wow, how unreasonable and perseverative they are!" We are seeking to discuss, while you are seeking to proclaim and denounce. I am not HERE saying which is better. I'm just pointing out that a lot of the problem is that we are doing two very different things with different goals.

To you all, the raising of a contradictory fact or the pointing out of a logical anomaly is an interference with your divine mission of denunciation and proclamation, so it must be driven out somehow -- anyhow. To us the repetition and piling up of citations just looks like throwing one rock after another and not stopping to see if they were well-aimed.

This can lead to a certain level of animosity. And, indeed, if my take is right, then I see no point in "engaging" with you all, except possibly socially and, maybe, in prayer sometimes.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


	Padre Pio exhibited stigmata throughout his life, starting in 1911