PURPOSE

There was a time when Kings could allegedly heal certain diseases with their touch – just because they were the King. Although, for today's man, this may sound like superstition or an overdose of religious credulity, this phenomenon is next to impossible to deny, thanks to the extensive number of cases of this phenomena throughout history.

The purpose of this document is to enable the Faithful to separate the "wheat" from the "chaff" in the seemingly never-ending array of healing miracles which have accompanied Christianity and - most specifically - Catholicism.

Those whose Faith is based on God will leave this document with even stronger Faith. Those whose Faith is purely intellectual may want to exit this document right now because "your Faith world" may come crashing down.


DETAILS

There are many detailed testimonies that French and British Kings seemed to have had the power to heal - through the imposition of their hands, or by curing the afflicted individual who touched them. In today's world, where Royalty is more of a State decoration or a status symbol for some nations, it is very hard to imagine or visualize what the figure of the Monarch meant to everyone centuries ago, regardless of their social level.

When authors of centuries past wrote about their Kings, they seem to be overcome by a supernatural devotion. They often viewed their monarch as a quasi-Divine Personage, to be honored and served by all.

The French Marshall Marmont, born fifteen years before the French Revolution broke out, writes in a passage of his memoirs about the prestige Louis XVI had, even as the French Monarchy was about to end in a blood bath: "I felt toward the King in a manner hard to define; a feeling of devotion with religious character. The King's word had a 'magic' quality, a power that nothing could alter. In pure and just hearts, such devotion turned into almost a cult."

Medieval kings used their power to heal scrofula, a word used at the time to designate various infectious diseases such as plague, smallpox or tuberculosis. The diseases that were labeled as “scrofula” were marked by the absence of effective treatment, virulence, and high likelihood of spreading infection due to poor hygiene. Epidemics ravaged towns and villages, especially in times of famine and starvation. (Such famines were often the result of poor harvests and wars.) Many believed that they could only be cured through the laying-on of hands by the miracle working Monarch. Being healed in such manner was a grace that was not available to a villain who suffered these ailments.

French and English Monarchs were prominent in the tradition of Healings-by-the-King. In Gaul, scrofula was called "mal du roi" [meaning "an illness for the King to cure"]. Its miraculous cure is credited in particular to Clovis (481-511 AD), the Merovingian king who was the first of the monarchs to use this alleged power.  It is said the first such miracle worked by King Clovis was performed on Lanicet, a worker at the Royal Stables for whom King Clovis felt a special appreciation.

According to legend, one night Clovis had a dream in which he was healing Lanicet with the simple touch of his hands. After the dream, the room was illuminated by a powerful white light. The next day, King Clovis touched Lanicet in the same way he had seen in the dream - and Lanicet was miraculously cured. Thereafter, the successors of King Clovis claimed the gift of their ancestor – perhaps, until the end of the Merovingian dynasty. However, this tale became quite popular in the sixteenth century through the work of Stephen Forcatel, whose "Treatise of the empire and the philosophy of the French" was published in 1579 AD in order to further exalt the French monarchy.

There is no documentation of the king's miraculous touch after the fall of the Merovingian dynasty in 751 AD, until the accession of the Capetian dynasty (987-1328 AD), due to the holy character ascribed to the new dynasty. There was a change, however. Now the "healing power" was no longer inherited through the blood line, but was obtained as a result of being anointed and upon the acquisition of a royal title.

The first miracle working healing ritual in this new cycle has been attributed to Robert the Pious (996-1031 AD), the second ruler from the Capetian dynasty. From that time onward, due to medieval superstition and reverence for royalty, the belief in the miracle working power of French kings spread. This belief persisted into the eighteenth century.

 The belief in the king’s miraculous touch was not unique to France. In England, this belief appeared during the reign of King Edward the Confessor (1002-1066 AD), the first English monarch to cure scrofula.

Legend has it that the ever-pious Edward the Confessor, a devotee of John the Evangelist, was walking down the street one day when he met a paralyzed man, for whom the King felt great sorrow - to the point that he carried him on his shoulders and took him to a church. The moment the body of the paralyzed man made contact with the king, his infirmity was miraculously cured and he began to walk. This legend and other pious works he practiced earned King Edward his canonization. The pious King became St. Edward the Confessor in 1161, by the decree of Pope Alexander III.

With Edward began the legends of miracle working powers of English kings.

 Charles II of England is acclaimed as the monarch who cured the most patients - some 100,000 cures, people say.

It is interesting to note that: (a) Kings James I and William III were skeptical about their miracle working powers, although they continued performing cures at the recommendation of their advisers; and (b) No such legendary power was attributed to Charlemagne (742/745-814 AD).

We could go on for pages, since a whole book (1) was published on 2007 covering this subject matter at length. However, what we have transcribed from that source (and from another source (2) ) should be more than enough for the points we wish to make.


CONCLUSIONS

A. We are sure that many legends abound regarding such "Royal Curative Powers", but we have no doubt that many - perhaps even more than 50 % of those claimed miracles - actually took place. The question is: Why? Which brings us to part B.

B. Why did so many miraculous cures came through the hands of very ordinary - and most likely not-so-holy - men? Let us go to the Fountain of All Wisdom - The Holy Scriptures.

A simple search with the words "faith" and "heal" yields a minimum of fifty results in the New Testament alone. There are only two types of healing, which can be best exemplified with the following two sets of verses, verses which hinge on a key pronouncement by Jesus.

Key Pronouncement:


Typical Type I Cure


Typical Type II Cure


In the Type I cure, the faith of the individual needing the cure is the key to his/her cure. For this type of healing, the key was having faith: in Jesus, or King Robert the Pious, or even in King James I (who was skeptical about such healings). In essence - if the individual has enough faith, even in an inanimate object, the cure will take place (if it is the Will of God, of course!) - as we can see in Matthew 9.22 and many other verses.

In the Type II cure, the beneficiary of the cure/miracle has no idea that someone else (who has the "faith as a grain of mustard seed"), has invoked Divine power to achieve a cure for the beneficiary - as we can see in Matthew 8:13 and many other verses.

We can also have a Type I and Type II combined scenario. For example, when there was a large throng before Jesus:


It logically follows that the people - even the high ranking noblemen like French Marshall Marmont (as we showed above) - held their Kings in such high esteem that their "faith (in the King) hath made them whole". In such cases, the holiness - or lack thereof - of the King was irrelevant to the healing.

Many others were not cured at "the touch of the King" (something also reported by the sources). This could have been because (a) they did not have enough faith that the King could do so; (b) they felt unworthy to be cured; or simply (c) God knew that it would harm their souls in the long term and would not allow it.


C. It logically follows that most of the miracles used by the "Saint Factory" at the Vatican cannot be used to prove the "sanctity", "holiness" and/or "worthiness" of the individual being railroaded into Sainthood, if the beneficiary of the “miracle” was involved at all in the process.

The only way a miracle could be used to prove the sanctity of the intercessor would be when the beneficiary of the healing was not aware at all about the intercession being offered by the saint-to-be on behalf of the beneficiary, before the Throne of God.

Amazingly enough: the information and logic presented above disqualifies many existing "Saints". At the same time, it confirms the Sanctity of many who had not even crossed the veil yet.

For example - the Santo Subito concept used for John Paul II cannot hold water. Popular, yes; Santo, we shall see.

On the other hand, John Bosco could have legitimately been proclaimed a Saint one second after his death. (This could not have been done before his death, because under Canon Law, one must cross the veil before being declared a Saint.) He was a veritable "miracle securing machine" for many decades.



EPILOGUE

(a) For a true miracle to work through the intercession of a third party, the beneficiary, if aware of the intercessions on his/her behalf, only needs very little faith.

(b) A true miracle can be obtained through the intercession of a third party, with the beneficiary being a non-believer, as long as the beneficiary is not aware of the intercession on his/her behalf.

(c) For an apparent miracle to occur by the request of the beneficiary, he/she needs to have great faith in whatever person or object he/she feels will cause the cure.

(d) An individual without faith can even block Jesus Christ - in person - from working a miracle on him/her....




____________________
(1) Historia Oculta de los Reyes - Óscar Herradón - Ed. Espejo de Tinta, Madrid, 2007.
(2) Source No. 2
(3) Editorial assistance by Lee Penn.



Published  in Honor of Mary, Miraculous Mother which is celebrated on June 9th, 2011
Expanded the Title on April 4th, 2013

© Copyright 2011 - 2016 by The M+G+R Foundation. All rights reserved. However, you may freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1) Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made for it.


The M+G+R Foundation
About Us and Frequently Asked Questions



Our Research Department





Please Note: If the above dated image does not appear on this document, it means that you are not viewing the original document from our servers. Should you have reason to doubt the authenticity of the document, we recommend that you access our server again and click on the "Refresh" or "Reload" button of your Browser to view the original document.

If you wish to contact The M+G+R Foundation, please Click Here and follow the instructions.