personally i don’t know that’d i’d get behind it unconditionally but i’m not about to call the patriarchs involed perpetrators of fraud.
i think it’s compeltely possible that its a miracle and i’d hope and expect if someone in the church had evidence to the contrary they’d either stop the ceremony or come forward with the truth.
Look, if someone wants to believe it's a miracle, that's fine with me. As long as it is not presented as fact.
Part of this is biblical fault, with all sorts of miraculous "accounts." For instance, Acts 5:14-16 suggest that +Peter's shadow was enough to heal people "afflicted by unclean spirits."
The whole concept of the disease in biblical terms is froth with such fluff. They all believed that sickness is caused by 'unclean spirits' and 'healing' was essentially exorcism. This applied to blind, "lepers" (which were not really true lepers as Hanson's disease was not known in Palestine in those days), the lame, the hysterical, etc.
The biggest stumbling block to miracles is that it suggests we can come to believe through them. From God's revelation, and in contrast to what the authors of various biblical books wrote, we understand that faith requires receptive minds and Holy Spirit. And as far as I know, the Holy Spirit did not descend on anyone and caused no one to believe until the Pentecost, so it is an enigma to me how could all those biblical people "come to believe" after seeing what we call "miracles."
Either the Holy Spirit was sent on the people before the Pentecost or the "rules" of belief have changed.