An image from the recognitio of the body of St. “Padre” Pio


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Matt Q says:

    I think this is a very good thing for the Faithful. I had read that Padre Pio’s body is almost incorrupt and that there are no signs of the Stigmata and that his hands appear to have been beautifully manicured. Cool. I believe this further proves he had the Stigmata and that, yes, the Stigamata is a gift from God. All the medical examinations Padre Pio underwent while he was alive showed he had unexplained wounds. Now not have to have a trace of them after death proves the Stigmata was supernatural in its origins, and he wasn’t faking it.

    One more thing. Why is there condensation in the coffin? ew.

  2. Ottaviani says:

    Why on earth are they doing this now and not before he was canonised?

    If I am not mistaken, I also understand that this was done against the wishes of Padre Pio\’s living relatives.

  3. John says:

    So is his body incorruptable?

  4. Phil says:

    John: So is his body incorruptable?,

    Judging from this coverage from the BBC that would not be the case:

    “The body had been conserved well, said Archbishop Domenico D’Ambrosio.

    ”As soon as we got inside the tomb we could clearly make out the beard. The top part of the skull is partly skeletal but the chin is perfect and the rest of the body is well preserved,” he said. ”

    PS: preview button not working….

  5. cm says:

    Now not have to have a trace of them after death proves the Stigmata was supernatural in its origins, and he wasn’t faking it.

    The stigmata completely cleared just before Padre Pio’s death. As he said, they weren’t meant for a “decoration”.

  6. Tim Ferguson says:

    I’m not familiar with Italian civil law on the issue, but I would have to say, from an ecclesiastical position, the wishes of St. Pio’s living relatives have very little to do with the matter. As a canonized saint, his relics have become ecclesiastical goods, and their use, keeping always in mind the good of the faithful, is governed by canon law. Canonically, (and again, I don’t know Italian civil law or its implications in this matter) his biological family does not control him any longer – his relics belong to the Church.

  7. Michael says:

    What a sad thought that the niece of one of the greatest modern saints took a stand against the veneration of her uncle’s relics. Something that came so naturally to Catholics for hundreds of years is foreign and disgusting to them today. Glad to see the Church didn’t cave in on this one.

  8. David Andrew says:


    Unless I’m mistaken, proof of incorruptability isn’t a prerequisite for canonization, if that’s why you asked.

    Similarly, there is a common practice of periodically checking a saint who, by virtue of other aspects of their life, may have been blessed with incorruptability.

    Also I believe there are “degrees” of incorruptability. Often incorrupts, after multiple exhumations, experience a certain degree of decay which is corrected or halted with an application of wax.

    It’s a truly fascinating subject, one that I only recently experienced first-hand (pardon the pun) when I was privileged to see and handle (in it’s reliquary, of course) up-close the incorrupt hand of St. Margaret Clithrow, a saint of York, England. Her relic is housed in the remarkable “Bar Convent,” which from the street looks like a storefront. (Lots of history to this that’s off-topic. Just thought I’d share.)

Comments are closed.