VI 
 
 A 
 
 i 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
The FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 AND 
 
 THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 BY 
 
 DR. A. MARCHAND 
 
 PRESIDENT OF THE MEDICAL BUREAU AT LOURDES 
 
 TRANSLATED BY 
 
 DOM FRANCIS IZARD, O.S.B., 
 
 M.R.C.S.Eng,, L.R.C.P.Lond. 
 
 boston , 
 
 CHt-bUUji 
 
 j t- 
 
 ; S 
 
 UBRAR’s' 
 
 MASS, 
 
 NEW YORK, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO 
 
 BENZIGER BROTHERS 
 
 PRINTERS TO THE I PUBLISHERS OF 
 
 HOLY APOSTOLIC SEE | BENZIGER’S MAGAZINE 
 
 1924 
 
3 T 4.53 
 
 j': <•') %. 
 
 207460 
 
 Made and Printed in Great Britain 
 
To His Lordship 
 
 MGR. SCHOEPFER 
 
 Bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes 
 
 In Token of Respect and Gratitude 
 

 
LETTER OF THE SECRETARY OF 
 STATE TO HIS HOLINESS 
 
 No. 20,617] The Vatican, 
 
 July 26, 1923. 
 
 Dear Doctor, 
 
 Our holy Father Pope Pius XI has graciously 
 deigned to accept the gift you have made him of 
 your recent work entitled ‘ ‘ The F acts of Lourdes 
 and the Medical Bureau.” 
 
 Your position fully enables you to judge of the 
 value of the Medical Bureau, to estimate the role it 
 plays at Lourdes, and to make this known to the 
 public. 
 
 This work, as accurate and sincere as it is able, is 
 another incontestable authority bearing witness to 
 the glory of the Immaculate Virgin, and the benefits 
 bestowed through her. 
 
 The Sovereign Pontiff thanks you for the gift, and 
 its accompanying filial sentiments, felicitates you on 
 your work at the Medical Bureau at Lourdes, and 
 willingly accords you his paternal and apostolic 
 Benediction. With my personal thanks for the copy 
 you have also sent me, 
 
 I remain, my dear Doctor, 
 
 Yours sincerely in Christ, 
 
 P. Card. Gasparri. 
 
 To Dr. Marchand, 
 
 Vice-President of the Lourdes 
 Medical Bureau. 
 
 Vll 
 
LETTER OF MONSIGNOR SCHOEPFER, 
 BISHOP OF TARBES AND LOURDES 
 
 Our Lady of Lourdes, 
 September 29, 1922. 
 
 (.Feast of St Michael the Archangel.) 
 
 My dear Doctor, 
 
 I am late on account of my heavy work—as 
 you see, I accuse and excuse myself at the same 
 time—in thanking you for the delicate attention of 
 dedicating to me your work entitled The Facts of 
 Lourdes and the Medical Bureau. 
 
 I wished also before writing to you to read this 
 work, being convinced that I should have to add to 
 my thanks the most sincere felicitations. To-day I 
 give myself this double pleasure. 
 
 Your readers, and they will be numerous, will, like 
 me, hasten to congratulate the Doctor who joins to 
 professional knowledge clearness of exposition; in 
 the examination of the sick, and of those cured, acts 
 conscientiously and scrupulously, combining with a 
 critical spirit enlightened faith and virile piety. 
 
 The merit of all this is enhanced by being set 
 forth concisely and in good literary style. 
 
 I can and ought therefore to call the attention of 
 the Faithful to your work, recommending it at the 
 same time to all lovers of the truth. Whilst I was 
 writing to you, there fell at that moment from 
 
 ix 
 
X LETTER OF MONSIGNOR SCHOEPFER 
 
 Heaven, as it were under the auspices of the Arch¬ 
 angel, a splendid postscript, which I am, as it were, 
 the angel messenger to convey to you. 
 
 His Holiness Pope Pius XI in his paternal good¬ 
 ness, moved also by his filial and deep devotion to 
 our Lady of Lourdes, has deigned to address me a 
 Brief, by which he does us—I say “us” deliberately 
 —the honour to name you a Knight of the Order of 
 St Gregory. 
 
 This is the highest praise that could be bestowed 
 upon you and your work. There is no need for me 
 to add a word to this witness of your merits. With 
 most cordial congratulations, 
 
 Believe me, my dear Doctor, 
 
 Yours affectionately and devotedly, 
 
 F. Xavier, 
 
 Bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes. 
 
 To Dr. Marchand, 
 
 Vice-President of the Medical 
 Bureau at Lourdes. 
 
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE 
 
 “ ' I 'HOSE effects are rightly to be called miracles,” 
 
 X says St Thomas Aquinas, “which are wrought 
 by Divine power apart from the order usually ob¬ 
 served in nature” (Contra Gentes , L. Ill, c. 102). 
 
 To dem ons tr ate the se inexplicable cures which un¬ 
 doubtedly do occur at Lourdes is the raison d'etre 
 of the Medical Bureau. 
 
 Were there no medical examination and enquiry, 
 all sorts of spurious cures would be circulated as 
 miraculous to the great detriment of religion. This 
 work of Dr. Marchand’s, the President, shows 
 well what the Bureau essays to do, and the various 
 difficulties it has to contend with. These difficulties 
 are mainly two-fold: they arise, firstly, from the 
 enthusiasm of the crowds, who are prone to see the 
 miraculous in any case which appears to them inex¬ 
 plicable; and, secondly, from the ranks of the medical 
 profession itself, in the form of insufficient medical 
 certificates. 
 
 We have recently been told that “the conditions 
 obtaining at Lourdes clearly reveal that nothing 
 which can rightly be called medical investigation is 
 possible there.” In the last thirty years more than 
 7,800 medical men have visited the Bureau; surely if 
 there were truth in this drastic statement more would 
 have been heard about it. As Dr. Marchand says, 
 
 xi 
 
xii TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE 
 
 “ Perfection is not of this world.” The Bureau 
 makes no pretensions to medical infallibility; the 
 President himself acknowledges that mistakes have 
 been made. “When this occurs, however, the facts 
 are invariably conscientiously noted in our archives, 
 and brought to the notice of the public by means of 
 our official organ, the Journal of the Grotto ” 
 (p. 90). The criticisms directed against the Medical 
 Bureau almost invariably come from those who have 
 not been there, who seem to think that “ the reputa¬ 
 tion of Lourdes, and its power for good, depends on 
 the good-will of the scientific world,” and who 
 clamour for the Medical Bureau to be converted into 
 a species of hospital clinic. 
 
 Sick pilgrims come to see our Lady of Lourdes, 
 the “ Health of the Sick,” and not to have anything 
 to do with the medical profession, except in the event 
 of their cure. 
 
 We are also told that “there are serious grounds 
 for anxiety as to the manner in which the honour of 
 our Lady and of the Church is being maintained by 
 a body of admittedly sincere and pious doctors, who, 
 owing to the prevailing conditions, are unable to 
 render efficient medical service.” The answer again 
 here is surely to be found in the frequent presence of 
 Monsignor the Bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes, and 
 many other Bishops at the medical debates, who 
 have not considered the honour of our Lady and the 
 Church to be imperilled by the work of the Bureau, 
 but rather the reverse. 
 
 The translator of this work has been enabled to 
 spend at Lourdes two long visits during the time of 
 
TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE 
 
 xm 
 
 the great Pilgrimages, amounting in all to almost 
 five months, and hardly a day passed without a 
 considerable amount of time spent in the Bureau. 
 He is himself convinced that he has seen cures which 
 medical science cannot and never will explain, and 
 believes that it would be extremely difficult for any¬ 
 body to pass an equal amount of time there and not 
 arrive at the same conclusion. 
 
 DOM FRANCIS IZARD, O.S.B. 
 

 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 I RETURNED full of enthusiasm, and pro¬ 
 foundly moved, from the first French National 
 Pilgrimage at which I had assisted; naturally I was 
 anxious that others, especially medical men, should 
 share my convictions, and it was with a certain 
 measure of surprise that I discovered that the facts 
 of Lourdes were even yet not sufficiently known 
 amongst Catholics. 
 
 Some had vaguely heard that in a little town of the 
 Pyrenees supernatural events did occur; others gave 
 only a half-hearted attention to facts which they were 
 told were not articles of faith. Many formed their 
 opinions on the erroneous tales of pilgrims, or on 
 books written in an adverse party spirit, whilst the 
 great majority did not take the trouble to enquire 
 about a subject which did not directly concern them. 
 
 Doctors are usually sceptical people, but too many 
 of them absolutely ignore Lourdes, and are simply 
 amazed when they are told of the cures that do occur 
 there, as also at the facilities placed at their disposal 
 to examine the cases. 
 
 For many years now I have frequented the Medical 
 Bureau. The late President, my esteemed colleague 
 Dr. Boissarie, accepted me as his collaborator; it was 
 with him and under his direction that I took part in 
 this clinic of the supernatural, to the direction of 
 which I was one day to be called. 
 
 xv 
 
xvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 I think that the experience I have had authorises 
 me to add my modest contribution towards spread¬ 
 ing the knowledge of the events that occur on the 
 banks of the Gave. 
 
 Many have written about Lourdes. Both partisans 
 and adversaries of the miraculous have put forward 
 their arguments, exchanged views, and discussed 
 them often with a certain amount of heat. These 
 numerous works contain valuable documents which 
 manifest clearly the supernatural nature of the cures, 
 and the measure in which they can be controlled and 
 scrutinised. 
 
 As a result of my study and personal experience, 
 I have also essayed to refute the attacks so often 
 brought against the truths of Lourdes, the point I 
 especially desire to emphasise being the role played 
 by the Medical Bureau and by medical men in con¬ 
 nection with the Grotto of Lourdes. 
 
 Conformably to the decrees of the Church, I declare 
 that each time I use the word “ miracle ” or “ miracu¬ 
 lous,” I do not intend more than “extraordinary 
 facts,” or “facts not explicable by natural laws,” the 
 real decision as to the “ miraculous ” being left to the 
 canonical enquiry of the Church. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Letter from Cardinal Gasparri - - vii 
 
 Letter from the Bishop of Tarbes and 
 Lourdes - - - - ix 
 
 Translator’s Preface - - xi 
 
 Introduction - - - - xv 
 
 CHAPTER 
 
 I. Preliminaries ----- i 
 II. The Facts - - - - 17 
 
 III. The Medical Bureau - - 71 
 
 IV. The Doctors - - - - - 100 
 
 V. Conclusions - - - - - 146 
 
 Index ------ 149 
 
 XVII 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 FACING PAGE 
 
 Zola’s “La Grivotte” (Marie Lebranchu) - 19 
 
 Louis Thurel of Verdun - - 30 
 
 Mademoiselle Juliette Nancey of Chaumont - 33 
 Mademoiselle Ernestine Guilloteau of Taillis 43 
 
 Mademoiselle Ernestine Guilloteau (One Year 
 after Cure) - - - - - 44 
 
 Mademoiselle Pr- - 46 
 
 Mademoiselle Ir&ne Salin of Mouri^s - - 51 
 
 Mademoiselle Valentine Gougaud of Rennes- 57 
 Dr. Boissarie • - - - - 75 
 
 The Bureau des Constatations M^dicales - 77 
 
 Mademoiselle Claire Paquignon at the Bureau 135 
 Mademoiselle Claire Paquignon (after Cure) 137 
 
 XIX 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES AND 
 THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 PRELIMINARIES 
 
 The message given to Bernadette—The crowds at Lourdes— 
 Absence of complete indifference—Believers and un¬ 
 believers—The prodigies—Medical control of the first 
 facts—Spiritual graces. 
 
 I N an unknown town of the Pyrenees, on February 
 ii, 1858, at about 11 o’clock in the morning, 
 little Bernadette, the child of a poor miller, just as 
 she was taking off her stockings to wade a stream, 
 suddenly saw in a niche of rock “ something dressed 
 in white”—a beautiful Lady, the Immaculate Virgin. 
 
 Bernadette was ignorant, very simple, with not 
 the least tendency to mysticism; the Lady asked her 
 that a church should be built there, adding: “ I wish 
 people to come here ” ; and the child, without search¬ 
 ing for the slightest explanation, simply repeated 
 what she had heard and seen. 
 
 In response to the commands given to the humble 
 girl, thousands and thousands have come from all 
 parts of the world to kneel at this spot, and thousands 
 and thousands of lips have recited the “ Hail Mary ” 
 of the Rosary. 
 
 In spite of the hate and sarcasm of those who 
 wished to silence them, these prayers have continued, 
 
2 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 and divine Providence has replied to them by sus¬ 
 pending natural laws and reversing the verdict of 
 human science. The most incurable complaints have 
 been cured instantaneously, and health restored to 
 those who had been abandoned by medical science. 
 
 For sixty years now Lourdes has presented a 
 marvellous sight from the religious point of view. 
 Immense crowds flock there to implore aid through 
 the intercession of the blessed Virgin. Vast multi¬ 
 tudes honour the blessed Sacrament, acclaiming its 
 passage, just as formerly Christ was acclaimed in 
 Judea. Those who have witnessed these moving 
 sights can never forget them. The invocations to 
 Jesus and his holy Mother, during the immersions in 
 the piscines, at the Grotto, and on the great Espla¬ 
 nade of the Rosary Church, are the spontaneous 
 manifestations of faith and piety, and the response 
 of divine mercy to those prayers is a bestowal of 
 abundant graces, not only to souls, but also to sick 
 and dying bodies. 
 
 During the blessing of the sick all eyes follow the 
 Sacred Host, and hands are stretched imploringly 
 towards him who is the Resurrection and the Life. 
 " Lord, that I may see ”; “ Lord, that I may hear ”; 
 " Lord, say but one word, and I shall be healed ”— 
 such are the cries rising from these great crowds; and 
 not infrequently the dying raise themselves, the blind 
 see, the deaf hear, and the sick walk with a firm step. 
 
 Such are the facts—facts which continue with con¬ 
 stant regularity. 
 
 These prodigies manifested themselves suddenly, 
 in a century of unbelief, in spite of the protestations 
 
PRELIMINARIES 
 
 3 
 
 of so-called science, and now have finally been classed 
 as inexplicable yet undeniable. Despite mockery and 
 bitter attacks, France to start with, then the world at 
 large, have heard of the marvels occurring on the 
 banks of the Gave: little by little they have become 
 historic facts. 
 
 Now pilgrimages are organised from all parts of 
 the world, enormous crowds come together before the 
 rock of Massabielle, and great numbers who had 
 closed their ears to all religious teaching have yet 
 acknowledged the facts and believed as the result of 
 the prodigies they have seen—prodigies which run 
 absolutely counter to natural laws. 
 
 These recitals have somewhat perturbed the un¬ 
 believers and anticlericals. That “miracles are im¬ 
 possible” was for them an axiom based on Science 
 and Reason; yet at the voice of a child, who was 
 “certainly hallucinated,” the attention of all has 
 been fixed on Lourdes. From a sombre grotto there, 
 a ray of light has emanated in all directions, attract¬ 
 ing the attention of believers, atheists, freethinkers, 
 the learned and the ignorant. 
 
 The faithful thank God, prostrate themselves before 
 the marvels he has deigned to work. Others are rest¬ 
 less, hesitate, and ask themselves if the moment has 
 really come to acknowledge the supernatural. Others, 
 again, smile maliciously, simply refusing to believe, 
 for they know that this would involve changing their 
 ideas, and their mode of life. Even some Catholics 
 refuse to examine the facts which they have more or 
 less vaguely heard spoken of, alleging that they are 
 not articles of faith; they refuse to study the evidence, 
 
4 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 or reflect about them. Nevertheless they do form 
 some sort of an opinion—an opinion usually coloured 
 by the fantastic tales they have heard, and the 
 writings of hostile critics, who look upon the miracu¬ 
 lous as impossible, or as having occurred solely 
 during the life of our Lord. 
 
 We see, then, faith, negation, ridicule, ignorance, 
 but never complete indifference. 
 
 Here, in a place formerly unknown but now cele¬ 
 brated, Science is obliged to avow its impotence, and 
 Reason bow before Faith. 
 
 If unbelievers were really loyal and sincere, they 
 would examine the evidence, renounce preconceived 
 notions, and render homage to the Truth. 
 
 In the presence of facts duly witnessed and 
 scientifically controlled, the most prejudiced free¬ 
 thinkers are somewhat disconcerted, and shaken in 
 their scepticism in spite of themselves. 
 
 The facts of Lourdes are not simply legendary 
 recitals, handed down by tradition and history. No; 
 they are actual realities, facts which can be examined 
 and studied; everyone can satisfy himself as to 
 their authenticity. Veritable resurrections occur; 
 organs disorganised or partially destroyed regain 
 their integrity : and this in the full light of day, so 
 that the critic can, if he wishes, examine the facts 
 and verify them by his scientific knowledge. 
 
 It is true, a 'priori , that Reason declares such facts 
 incompatible with Science, and Science, so called, 
 resists the evidence. But why ? Has Science arrived 
 at perfection ? Has it probed into and solved all 
 Nature’s secrets? Are there no problems left? As a 
 
PRELIMINARIES 
 
 5 
 
 matter of fact, Science, assuming an infallibility, 
 absolutely denies the supernatural; but refusing to 
 examine and discuss, by that very fact seems to avow 
 its incompetence to judge. When it does consent to 
 examine the facts it finds itself face to face with irre¬ 
 futable evidence, and has to allow itself vanquished. 
 The facts of Lourdes testify to the imperfection and 
 feebleness of that Science which believed it could 
 solve all problems. 
 
 At the present time, at the foot of the Grotto, where 
 the frail and simple Bernadette saw and heard “the 
 Lady,” the intellectual world is divided into two 
 camps—believers and unbelievers. 
 
 More than ever there is an obstinate combat between 
 the two armies—between truth and error, between true 
 Science and false Philosophy. When the latter makes 
 recruits, it is not by the logic of her teaching, but 
 because such Philosophy, contrary to true Science, 
 flatters and encourages man’s worst instincts. 
 
 True Science and sane Philosophy believe that there 
 exists a creative and sustaining power, a First Cause 
 —God, personal, intelligent, free, independent, and 
 infinitely powerful. From this idea of God the pos¬ 
 sibility of miracles proceeds in a natural way. 
 
 For the last sixty years Lourdes has manifested the 
 intervention of a supernatural power. How is it that 
 the facts have always aroused so much opposition ? 
 
 Lapse of time obscures facts. Little by little they 
 come to be regarded as legendary. The more ancient 
 an event, the less real it seems to be. We regard as 
 certain what we have seen ourselves. Our certitude 
 is less for facts narrated to us if we have not seen them, 
 
6 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 even though they have been contemporaneous; and if 
 they are in the distant past, we regard them with a 
 certain amount of incredulity. 
 
 The belief in the miraculous incidents of the Gospels 
 has tended to decrease during the centuries. To ex¬ 
 plain them numerous interpretations have been put 
 forward, and progressively in the case of many there 
 has grown up a certain amount of scepticism. From 
 doubt the passage is easy to deny the possibility of 
 the miraculous, and many have made it. 
 
 Well, I believe that the miracles of Lourdes are 
 jv.. strictly comparable to those of the Gospels, and are 
 capable of furnishing the latter with a degree of 
 certitude which many previously refused them. 
 
 Science is often said to deny the possibility of 
 supernatural facts; in the eyes of irreligious people 
 and atheists “no sensible man can admit the miracu¬ 
 lous.” But this affirmation rests upon no definite 
 basis; consequently, as it is unsupported by proof or 
 demonstration, the adversaries of religion fall back 
 upon insults and sarcasm. 
 
 Sometimes this hatred feigns indifference. There 
 are some freethinkers who put away any decisive 
 examination of the point, and instead of sarcasms 
 they prefer to discuss something else. They would 
 be delighted if the cures of Lourdes sank into complete 
 oblivion. Facts are facts, however, and one can do 
 nothing against them. 
 
 If the supernatural is mentioned to the proud, they 
 reply that God has something else to do than to 
 bother himself about the prayers coming from this 
 microscopic world; they will even try to prove that 
 
PRELIMINARIES 
 
 7 
 
 he does not exist; consequently it is impossible for him 
 to manifest himself here below. 
 
 In spite of everything - , however, Infinite Power—the 
 finger of God, as it were—does manifest itself at 
 Lourdes. Since the first apparitions of our blessed 
 Lady to Bernadette, cures have not ceased, and many 
 of these have been cases reputed incurable—cases, too, 
 which were nearing their termination. The majority 
 of the sick who visit Lourdes present grave lesions, 
 and divine Providence not infrequently chooses for 
 its manifestations the agonising and the dying. 
 
 The reality of these striking cures is incontestable; 
 the most incredulous have witnessed them. The 
 various interpretations of these cures do not stultify 
 their existence. Before searching for their cause we 
 must accept them with their logical consequences. 
 Whatever these may be, it is absolutely certain that 
 at Lourdes, bone diseases, ununited fractures of years’ 
 standing, ulcers, fistulas, and wounds of various sorts, 
 have been suddenly cured; cases of advanced phthisis, 
 with large lung cavities, are instantaneously cica¬ 
 trised as a result of a bath in the piscines. No con¬ 
 scientious man can remain indifferent to events which 
 are absolutely opposed to the natural order. Before 
 discussing their explanation let us direct our attention 
 in the first place to the reality of the organic lesions, 
 and to their disappearance. 
 
 Certainly everyone has the right to discuss the cures 
 which occur yearly at Lourdes, a right also to search 
 for a natural explanation; but, I repeat, no one has a 
 right to deny the facts, or from mere a priori reasoning 
 to deny their existence. As we shall see later on, the 
 
8 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 facts force themselves upon us despite theory and dis¬ 
 cussion. Explanatory theories and hypotheses do 
 not change their reality. They exist; and I repeat 
 once again, no one can remain indifferent in the 
 presence of sensible and visible phenomena, for these 
 form a base, a foundation which defies doubt. 
 
 To commence with, the cause of the cures at Lourdes 
 was assigned either to the chemical activity of the 
 water, or to its low temperature. Later on radio¬ 
 activity was invoked. Zola asked if, in addition to 
 the influence of the place, a bath in freezing water 
 might not be capable of curing tuberculous affections ? 
 
 As a matter of fact, the water from the spring in the 
 Grotto has no mineral, therapeutic, or radio-active 
 properties; careful analyses have repeatedly proved 
 this. The influence of the cold water cannot be the 
 cause, for the cures take place not only behind the 
 curtains which screen the baths, but also before 
 thousands of spectators on the Rosary Esplanade. 
 
 In the great space which is bounded by the ramps 
 which give access to the Basilica, and in front of the 
 crowned statue of our Lady, there are, during the 
 French National Pilgrimage, as many as a thousand 
 or twelve hundred sick, on stretchers, invalid 
 carriages, etc., lined up before a dense mass of fervent 
 pilgrims. The blessed Sacrament passes before them, 
 acclaimed by hosannas, and greeted with prayers of 
 supplication. To each sick person (or, if they are 
 extremely numerous, before small groups of them) the 
 benediction is given, and it is usually at these 
 moments, as formerly in Judea, that the paralysed get 
 up, the lame walk, and the dying live again. Those 
 
PRELIMINARIES 
 
 9 
 
 who have been present at this wonderful spectacle can 
 never forget it, nor the emotion they felt in the 
 presence of these wonderful manifestations. 
 
 During the National Pilgrimage of 1920, at the pro¬ 
 cession in the afternoon, I was surrounded by a group 
 of twenty-seven colleagues, who were our guests at the 
 time. It is a privilege of the doctors to follow the 
 blessed Sacrament immediately behind the Bishops, 
 and to pass thus before all the sick. The acclamations 
 of the enormous crowd, the pomp of the religious 
 ceremony, the imploring gestures, and prayers to 
 Jesus in the blessed Sacrament—the display of this 
 quintessence of human suffering and infirmity moved 
 even the most sceptical and indifferent. When we 
 returned to the Medical Bureau, one of the doctors, a 
 foreigner, said to me, with some disdain : “ Do not 
 ask me to take part again in your Procession. What 
 is to be thought of medical men who shed tears like 
 women ?” 
 
 From the very commencement of the apparitions, 
 medical study and a certain measure of scientific con¬ 
 trol have not been wanting at Lourdes. As soon as 
 Bernadette Soubirous commenced to be a popular 
 topic of conversation, medical men scrutinised the 
 minutest details of her character, her words, and her 
 actions. Some considered her as hallucinated and 
 hysterical, others accused her of lies and trickery. 
 The local practitioners, to commence with, shrugged 
 their shoulders, and declined even to discuss “these 
 superstitions.” What use in any enquiry ? What has 
 Science to do with such child’s play ? Dr. Dozous 
 alone was struck by the character of the little girl, and 
 
L 
 
 10 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 insisted that she was naturally well-balanced. The 
 various phenomena, he said, which were causing so 
 much excitement were well worth careful examination 
 and study, and he came to the conclusion that this 
 privileged child showed no traces whatever of any 
 mental disturbance. 
 
 The doctor at Nevers, who visited the Convent of 
 the Sisters of Charity where Bernadette had been ad¬ 
 mitted, stated that the young religious “is far from 
 showing any sign of mental symptoms; her simple and 
 tranquil character shows no disposition to nervous 
 trouble.” 
 
 Dr. Verges, Professor of the Faculty of Medicine at 
 Montpellier, who was a member of the Commission 
 appointed in 1858 by Mgr. Laurence, the Bishop of 
 Tarbes, to examine the sick said to have been cured 
 by the miraculous spring discovered by Bernadette, 
 wrote: “ On casting a glance over the cures of 
 
 Lourdes, one would say that there is a violation, an 
 upsetting of all our therapeutic measures, a definite 
 contradiction of the laws of Science, for the phenomena 
 certainly surpass human explanation. How are we to 
 explain the simplicity of the means and the greatness 
 of the result; the same remedy, yet the cure of various 
 diseases; the short duration of the curative agent, the 
 length of treatment necessary according to Science; 
 the success of the former, the failure of the latter ?” 
 
 Twenty years later, in 1886, Professor Verges wrote 
 the following declaration, which is preserved in a 
 place of honour on the walls of the Medical Bureau: 
 “ If I am asked what I have seen at Lourdes, I reply: 
 By the examination of duly authenticated facts, which 
 
PRELIMINARIES 
 
 11 
 
 are incontestably proved to be beyond the power of 
 medical art and science, I have seen, have touched, a 
 divine work, the miraculous ” 
 
 Since that time many doctors have visited Lourdes, 
 arriving there as absolute sceptics and irreconcilable 
 adversaries of the miraculous; they have left con¬ 
 vinced by the evidence, not being ashamed to avow 
 that they have witnessed facts accomplished before 
 their eyes which they were totally unable to explain. 
 In the case of those who judge Lourdes from a dis¬ 
 tance, and without eliminating their preconceived 
 philosophical convictions, the result is almost certain 
 to be negative: if instead of this the facts are ob¬ 
 served, and carefully studied on the spot, there is 
 every probability that they will arrive at the truth. 
 
 Littr£, in 1873, compared the miraculous to the 
 results obtained by magnetism, spiritism, etc., which, 
 he said, only occur in circles already convinced in 
 advance. For this author the happenings of Lourdes 
 were simply illusions bolstered up by a naive credulity 
 and definite fraud. In our own times, according to 
 Bernheim, the cures of Lourdes are authentic; the 
 facts undoubtedly exist, but their explanation is 
 erroneous. We can see, then, how in twenty years 
 there has been a considerable change of ideas. 
 
 The time of systematic contempt has passed. In 
 our days the facts of Lourdes are studied most 
 thoroughly. Still, in spite of reason and logic, there 
 is a hesitation about forming an opinion, and a refusal 
 to face the evidence. 
 
 How is it that, despite this great movement which 
 has now lasted fifty years, despite careful examina- 
 
12 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 tion, discussion and argument, despite numerous and 
 convincing testimony from hundreds and hundreds of 
 witnesses, there is yet scepticism ? 
 
 Scepticism exists because people do not wish to see. 
 Lourdes frightens them; it seems to lead them to 
 definite cross-roads. If they accept the facts they in¬ 
 evitably lead them on to the truth—and the practice 
 of the Faith. 
 
 More astonishing, however, at Lourdes than the 
 physical miracles are the miracles of grace which occur 
 in this atmosphere of prayer and charity. At Lourdes 
 reigns a true fraternity, a true equality. Examples of 
 this are constantly given by all: the stretcher-bearers, 
 the voluntary workers of both sexes in the hospitals 
 and piscines, all forget their own needs and fatigue 
 to devote themselves heart and soul to the care of their 
 poor and suffering brethren. At Lourdes the poor, 
 the unfortunate, are the masters; they find immedi¬ 
 ately on their arrival in the city of Mary comfortable 
 hospitals to receive them, solicitous care bestowed 
 upon their various ailments, comfort and consolation 
 for their sufferings. The sacrifices made to help 
 others, the mutual affection vivified by the same 
 faith, give the sick patience and resignation. Another 
 miracle at Lourdes is that there is always hope. 
 
 Who can compute the number of those who return to 
 God, as a result of breathing this atmosphere of faith 
 and piety ? Who can tell the conversions ? Some of 
 these we hear of, but the greater number are known 
 only to God. How many men without the slightest 
 disposition to piety, led by curiosity to the banks of 
 
PRELIMINARIES 
 
 13 
 
 the Gave, either by a chance journey, or by the tender 
 and persevering solicitude of a mother or wife, have 
 been absolutely overwhelmed by the spectacle of 
 ardent faith and prayer which surrounded them ? 
 How many have suddenly put away their past, their 
 ancient convictions, to become convinced and practis¬ 
 ing Catholics ? 
 
 One evening at about nine o’clock, during a large 
 pilgrimage, a priest issuing from the Rosary Church 
 was stopped by a young man, obviously labouring 
 under considerable emotion. He timidly asked the 
 priest to hear his confession. The numerous con¬ 
 fessionals were beset with penitents, and it would take 
 some time, said the young man, for he had not been 
 near a confessional for twenty years, not since his first 
 Communion; so, seated on one of the stone steps 
 which flank the door of the church, his confession 
 was heard. After the absolution had been pro¬ 
 nounced, and peace restored to this soul of good-will, 
 he said to the priest, with a face wet with tears : “ How 
 happy I am ! The desire to receive pardon for all my 
 sins suddenly overwhelmed me. Father,” he added, 
 “would you have the kindness to do me one more 
 service ? Come with me to see my dear mother; she 
 will scarcely believe me if you do not come as witness 
 of the grace you have accorded me.” 
 
 Evidently, if one places oneself solely on scientific 
 grounds, it is the curability of the apparently in¬ 
 curable which is the characteristic feature of Lourdes. 
 If, however, the whole is envisaged in the light of 
 religion; if the prayers, the edifying piety, which are 
 witnessed everywhere are taken into account, then the 
 
H 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 supernatural cures of the body are only one amongst 
 other manifestations of the spiritual life and Catholic 
 Faith. 
 
 God cures the sick not only to soothe pain and 
 restore health; his motive is more than cure—it is to 
 put the supernatural in evidence, it is to affirm his 
 infinite power. Our blessed Lady wishes that the 
 crowds at Lourdes shall be struck by the presence of 
 this supernatural power, and that they shall believe 
 more firmly. 
 
 Around the sanctuaries of Lourdes, the cure of the 
 body is not all; the contact works a real transforma¬ 
 tion in the soul. 
 
 What a sad spectacle is one of these poor unfortun¬ 
 ates stretched on his bed for months, perhaps for 
 years! Art has done what could be done, but now 
 there is no hope; the sufferer is condemned to lifelong 
 sickness, and he realises that all his efforts are useless. 
 
 When such cases set out for Lourdes, they support 
 with heroic courage all the inconveniences and dis¬ 
 comforts of the long journey; no complaints escape 
 from their lips—they patiently bear everything, up¬ 
 held and sustained by hope. 
 
 What deception, what disillusionment, if they do 
 not obtain their desire at Lourdes, if their paralysed 
 limbs are not cured, their pains do not cease, their 
 wounds remain unhealed! 
 
 Well, this is not the case. A prodigy is worked: 
 as soon as they arrive at Lourdes, raise their eyes to 
 the statue of our Lady, and bathe in the piscine, they 
 are transformed. The fear of not being cured dis¬ 
 appears ; it is replaced by a humble submission to the 
 
PRELIMINARIES 15 
 
 will of God. Not one departs from Lourdes uncon¬ 
 soled, uncomforted. 
 
 Undoubtedly one of the permanent miracles of 
 Lourdes is the resignation that is acquired there; it is 
 not infrequent to hear from the lips of the sick: “ O 
 God, do not cure me; I offer my sufferings, my life, 
 for those who are worse, who suffer more than I do.” 
 
 Boissarie 1 quotes the case of a consumptive patient 
 from Villepinte, who received one day the visit of a 
 Parisian doctor accompanied by his brother—an 
 engineer by profession, and a Protestant. The doctor 
 had given marks of his great interest in the poor 
 sufferer, and Juliette Foret had been much moved by 
 his sympathy. A few days after his visit she wrote 
 to a friend : “ I am hoping that the blessed Virgin will 
 cure me; I shall be very sad if my illness persists. 
 However, I willingly make the sacrifice of my health 
 and life, if it will ensure the conversion of Monsieur 
 
 X--, the Protestant who visited me recently.” Such 
 
 an offer received a very definite recompense; our Lady 
 of Lourdes answered all the prayers of the pious girl: 
 she herself was cured of phthisis, which was nearing 
 its fatal termination; the doctor became a Redemp- 
 torist priest, and the Protestant engineer a Catholic. 
 
 During the summer of 1920 Monsieur X-, a dis¬ 
 
 tinguished member of Parisian society, entered the 
 Medical Bureau. He was accompanied by his wife 
 and daughter. The latter was a charming child, 
 twelve years of age, with sweet and regular features, 
 endowed with unusual intelligence, and having the 
 appearance of perfect health; her otherwise pretty face 
 1 The Cures of Lourdes, first series, p. 70. 
 
16 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 was, however, completely marred by a pronounced 
 
 squint. With eyes full of tears, Madame X-told 
 
 me of the grief this caused both herself and her hus¬ 
 band. They had come to implore her cure from our 
 Lady of Lourdes, and did not doubt that their earnest 
 desire would be granted. 
 
 Three days afterwards I received again a visit from 
 the X- family. “Doctor,” said the mother, ap¬ 
 
 parently quite consoled, “ all three of us have made 
 the sacrifice of the cure. After all, we have earthly 
 wealth; this trouble is but a wound to our self-love, 
 and what is it in comparison to the revolting illnesses 
 which we see around us ? May the blessed Virgin still 
 continue our slight cross and come to the assistance 
 of our less fortunate brethren, for whom we offer our 
 prayers and this sacrifice.” 
 
 Who knows with what graces the Immaculate 
 Virgin may have recompensed such charity ? 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE FACTS 
 
 The miraculous cures—Incurable cases—Circumstances of 
 the cure — Persistence of the cure — La Grivotte — 
 Scientific opposition—Attacks made in bad faith—Pul¬ 
 monary tuberculosis— Louis Thurel—Juliette Nancey —The 
 time factor—Nervous diseases— Ernestine Guilloteau — 
 
 Mademoiselle Pr -Suggestion—The water of the spring— 
 
 Irene Salin—Valentine Gougaud —Nature’s unknown forces 
 —Natural cures—The enthusiasm of the crowd—Pre¬ 
 mature accounts and publications—Necessity for a Medical 
 Bureau. 
 
 I 
 
 O make any serious study of the supernatural 
 
 -L facts of Lourdes, it is most important in the first 
 place to understand clearly what is connoted by the 
 term “ a miraculous or supernatural cure.” 
 
 Some people have most erroneous ideas. A 
 “ miraculous ” cure does not necessarily indicate the 
 whole and complete restoration of some diseased 
 tissues, or the sudden reconstitution, as it were, of a 
 new organ. When a bone is destroyed by some 
 form of osteitis, with the separation of fragments 
 ( sequestra ), there is no necessity that the bone should 
 be restored to its original condition to constitute a 
 supernatural cure; nor, again, in the case of the lungs, 
 that it should be replaced by normal lung tissue : with 
 the latter the cure usually takes place by scar tissue, 
 the scar forming definite evidence of the old trouble— 
 the signature of the miracle , as it were. We are well 
 aware that outside those maladies which experience 
 and research have taught us are incurable, the re- 
 
 2 
 
i8 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 If 
 
 a * 4 
 
 **">v 
 
 T 
 
 re¬ 
 
 sources of Nature are enormous; with appropriate 
 treatment and time, the most alarming symptoms 
 may subside, leading to most unexpected improve¬ 
 ment, sometimes even to complete cure of the affected 
 organ. Such a result is only obtained after long and 
 persevering treatment. But when, after the failure of 
 all efforts, health returns abruptly without the con¬ 
 valescence which accompanies natural cures, when 
 healing is effected in the “ twinkling of an eye,” at that 
 precise moment when the patient and his friends are 
 invoking the divine mercy, then, I repeat, it is im¬ 
 possible to explain such a case by our own know¬ 
 ledge or experience. 
 
 Some are supernatural because the disease 
 
 is incurable; such is the case with cancer. Others, 
 again, owe their miraculous character to the mode, 
 as, for instance, a case of hip disease, or an ulcer 
 instantaneously cured. Here the instantaneity of the 
 cure is the supernatural feature, for it is in direct 
 contradiction with the laws of Nature, and could not 
 be accounted for by the perfection or skill of the 
 previous treatment. 
 
 Lourdes ! Supernatural cures ! With what dis¬ 
 dain and scorn these words were used to commence 
 with. However, in spite of this the name of the little 
 Pyrenean city became more widely known, and the 
 knowledge of the wonderful cures that occur there 
 penetrated everywhere. 
 
 Gradually intelligent people began to evince a 
 certain amount of legitimate curiosity. Those who 
 came and saw for themselves commenced to enquire 
 as to the cause of the strange phenomena they wit- 
 
ERRATUM 
 
 Page 18, line 14. For “some diseases are supernatural,” 
 read “some cures are supernatural.” 
 
ZOLA’S LA GR1 VOLTE (MARIE LEBRANCHU). 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 19 
 
 nessed. They found themselves in the presence of 
 cures which differed absolutely from those so far 
 obtained by medical science. 
 
 This difference is threefold— instantaneity , com¬ 
 pleteness) and permanence of the cure. The disease 
 suddenly disappears, leaving no trace. At the same 
 time the weakness produced by the illness also dis¬ 
 appears, even though it has been very extreme. In 
 short, the great majority of the cases are radically 
 cured, and never suffer from any relapse. 
 
 In the novel that he wrote about Lourdes in 1892, 
 Zola describes with great realism the disease and the 
 cure of three or four patients who had particularly 
 drawn his attention, in the special train which con¬ 
 veyed them there, which the novelist had been allowed 
 to accompany. 
 
 Choosing one of these patients—Mademoiselle 
 Marie Lebranchu, of Paris—he made her the heroine 
 of his book under the name of La Grivotte. Zola 
 describes with the minutest details all the symptoms 
 presented by “this girl of more than thirty—whose 
 curly hair and flaming eyes made her almost beautiful 
 —always sweating, breathing with difficulty, cough¬ 
 ing as if to cough her heart out—cavities, you know ! 
 —she can walk no longer, and eats almost nothing.” 
 In a word, the author is quite convinced of the gravity 
 and the incurability of Marie Lebranchu’s disease, 
 which was phthisis at its last stage; there was spitting 
 of blood, pus, and tubercle bacilli in the sputum. 
 
 Zola knew and said that the patient’s condition was 
 hopeless, and he does all that is possible to make his 
 readers share his conviction. Then he recounts the 
 
c 
 
 20 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 cure of La Grivotte; how she was scarcely immersed 
 in the piscine, when, as if impelled by some sudden 
 stimulus, she raised herself, crying out: ‘ ‘ I am cured ! ’ ’ 
 He followed her to the Medical Bureau, the doors of 
 which were widely opened to him. He assisted at the 
 official discussion made by more than twenty doctors, 
 who testified to the sudden disappearance of all the 
 lesions in the lungs, and was a witness of this veritable 
 resurrection. Finally, he saw her that same evening 
 in the torchlight procession, when she appeared to 
 have regained all her strength, and remarked that “if 
 the blessed Virgin had given a ball, La Grivotte would 
 have danced the whole night.” 
 
 Zola described a miracle, a true miracle; but as he 
 did not wish this at any price, he pretends that no 
 miracle took place, that the cure of Marie Lebranchu 
 was an illusion, nothing but a passing amelioration. 
 He gets rid of the patient, who would have been some¬ 
 what troublesome to him, and depicts how in the train 
 the terrible malady recommences, she spits blood 
 abundantly, and dies of consumption almost as soon 
 as she reaches Paris. 
 
 Well, as a matter of fact the cure of La Grivotte 
 was a permanent one: there was no illusion about it. 
 Zola's pretence that his heroine died after her journey 
 from Lourdes is an absolute falsehood. The sudden 
 cure of Marie Lebranchu’s tuberculous lesions was as 
 supernatural in its persistence as in its instantaneity. 
 The cure was absolutely definite, for it stood the test 
 of time. 
 
 Marie Lebranchu married, and becoming a widow, 
 did not die in 1892, but on August 11, 1920, twenty- 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 21 
 
 eight years after her cure. She died piously with the 
 Religious of the Good Shepherd at Angers, by whom 
 she had been brought up, and with whom she lived 
 after the death of her husband. 
 
 At Lourdes, the most diverse and serious diseases 
 are cured by a supernatural force which acts when, 
 where, or as it will, either suddenly repairing diseased 
 organs, eliminating morbid material, or creating new 
 living matter. 
 
 These manifestations of supernatural power, sus¬ 
 pending or reversing at will Nature’s laws, act beyond 
 our prevision or calculation. In the cures at Lourdes 
 not all are favoured. Why does this one rather than 
 that recover health? Are they always those who are 
 more worthy ? By no means; sometimes the in¬ 
 different or even the enemies of religion are cured! 
 Here we are in the presence of mystery, of insoluble 
 problems. 
 
 Whatever may be the cause, one fact is certain-—that 
 on the banks of the Gave cures of supposed incurable 
 diseases do take place, the cure taking place in a time 
 manifestly insufficient to produce natural cure. In 
 these cases there appears to be a change in the whole 
 constitution, for not only is the disease cured, but the 
 patient is protected from all return of that particular 
 ailment. What medical treatment is capable of giving 
 such a result ? 
 
 To reply to this question, a definite conclusion, and 
 not some half-truth, should be reached. In face of 
 such facts the answer should be either affirmative or 
 negative. The problem of Lourdes is clear and pre¬ 
 cise. The solution is not to be reached by multiplying 
 
22 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 theories, heaping up hypotheses, and elaborating data. 
 The facts are attested by numerous witnesses; they 
 should be examined after putting away preconceived 
 opinions and convictions; they should be examined 
 clinically, following a definite scientific method. If 
 this is done, then logically and irresistibly it will be 
 recognised that the limits of Nature and Science are 
 passed at Lourdes. 
 
 II 
 
 It is not difficult to understand the resistance that 
 reason makes to the facts of Lourdes; it is easy to 
 grasp, also, how difficult it is for the medical pro¬ 
 fession to reject knowledge acquired by study and 
 experience. Tumours disappear in the piscine. 1 Un¬ 
 healed fractures of long standing suddenly unite. 2 
 Wounds cicatrise in a second. 3 Phthisical cavities 
 suddenly dry up. 4 Lesions of the optic nerve 
 are radically cured. 5 Such facts as these cannot be 
 explained, for they are contrary to all medical ex¬ 
 perience. 
 
 1 Marie Richard, of Vauvilliers. Cancer of both breasts. 
 August 27, 1900.—Madame Travaillard, of Tours. Cancer of 
 the uterus. July 14, 1910.—Ren6 Clement, of Anglet, Basses- 
 Pyr^nees. Cancer of the face. October n, 1911. 
 
 * Pierre De Rudder. April 7, 1875.—Marguerite Verzier, of 
 Lyons. July 9, 1909. 
 
 3 Joacfiine Defiant. Ulcer extending from knee to ankle. 
 September 13, 1878.—Marie Borel, of Cultur, Lozere. Ster¬ 
 coral fistulae. August 22, 1907.—L^onie Ldveque, of Nogent- 
 le-Rotrou. Frontal sinus disease. July 18, 1908. 
 
 4 Aurelie Huprelle, of Beauvais. August 25, 1895.—Sister 
 St Ambrose of Limoges. August 23, 1911. 
 
 5 Madame Bir£, of Ste Gemme, Vendde. August 5, 1909.— 
 Henri Lebacq, of Douai. September 3, 1912. 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 23 
 
 Should such cures be accepted solely on hearsay 
 evidence ? No, they should be personally examined 
 and discussed. The great majority of those, how¬ 
 ever, who deny the facts of Lourdes have never 
 examined them on the spot. They started with pre¬ 
 conceived theories against the miraculous, and have 
 supported their theory by selecting cases which did 
 not offer sufficient guarantees. 
 
 Very frequently at the close of long arguments, of 
 evidence which cannot be refuted, they say with a 
 certain hesitation: “ Certainly, what you tell me is 
 most extraordinary! But—I have not seen it for 
 myself.” 
 
 What a vast number of things we believe without 
 having seen them for ourselves. When evidence 
 comes from trustworthy people; when it is not the 
 case of one witness {testis nullus\ but of twenty or a 
 hundred; when the evidence reposes not on one fact, 
 but on many extending over a long series of years— 
 is it not then more reasonable to believe ? 
 
 Supposing that one doctor only affirmed that in a 
 certain case or series of cases the ordinary laws of 
 medicine were violated, and that he had observed 
 phenomena in absolute contradiction to normal 
 clinical facts: it would certainly be quite reasonable 
 to doubt. It might be asked if he had not been under 
 some illusion, had some fixed idea, or been in definite 
 error. But when it is a case of observation concern¬ 
 ing cures which have stood the test of time, and have 
 every guarantee of authenticity, then it is not fair 
 to doubt the good faith and observation of so many 
 witnesses. 
 
24 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 A categorical denial is very easy, nothing more so; 
 but then, we must admit that all the doctors who have 
 looked after the patients, and have given evidence 
 of what they have personally seen, must either be 
 ignorant or impostors; that all those who have 
 examined the results carefully and believe in these 
 supernatural cures are either deceivers or deceived. 
 
 A certain Dr. R-, who published a large work 
 
 entitled The Truth about Lourdes A belonged to this 
 category. The doctor tells us that his aim was to 
 demonstrate that there was nothing extraordinary 
 about the apparitions of Lourdes, because Bernadette 
 was hysterical; consequently, there was no sufficient 
 basis for Lourdes to become a place of pilgrimage. 
 The reason he undertook this laborious task was, he 
 frankly tells us, because “he who possesses even a 
 part of the truth has the duty to make this known to 
 others.” 
 
 Dr. R-, then, considered it to be his duty to 
 
 reveal the truth, supported as it was by the teaching 
 of Science. How did he set about it ? Did he go to 
 Lourdes to study the cures ? 
 
 Not at all. In the quiet of his study on the other 
 side of the Mediterranean, he accumulated the neces¬ 
 sary documents which proved the “ dense ignorance ” 
 of everybody who had anything to do with making 
 Lourdes a place of pilgrimage. To support his 
 theory “that neurotic patients only have been, and 
 can be cured at Lourdes,’* does he reply to the alleged 
 facts by bringing counter-evidence? Against the 
 examinations of the Bureau does he oppose other 
 
 1 Paris: E. Nourry, 1910. 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 25 
 
 examinations ? Not at all. A friori he denies the 
 miraculous, and supports his thesis on what he deems 
 to be irrefutable arguments; but these arguments of 
 his rest on no serious base. 
 
 According to him, the majority of his colleagues 
 who have expressed their belief in the supernatural 
 are either ignorant or in bad faith, and the certificates 
 of those who are conscientious have been falsified. 
 (By whom ? Doubtless by the doctors at the Medical 
 Bureau at Lourdes.) Others have signed certificates 
 of cure, thinking that if they did not do so their 
 practice would suffer to some extent from the bigotry 
 of their patients. 
 
 The assertions, therefore, of only a small number 
 can be considered as worthy of credence, and this is 
 insufficient. The ordinary practitioner who attests 
 that his patient was cured at the Grotto knows per¬ 
 fectly well that the cure took place beforehand. 
 
 According to Dr. R-, when four phthisical 
 
 patients from that model establishment Villepinte 
 were cured in 1898, the doctors of Villepinte must 
 have made an error in diagnosis; . . . these cases 
 were hysterical ones simulating phthisis. And so 
 
 on . . . Dr. R-has previously told his readers 
 
 that the patients' cured are all hysterical; yet in spite 
 of this, amongst the cured are a large number of 
 malingerers, very skilful in deceiving others. 
 
 When this distinguished practitioner who pos¬ 
 sesses “ part of the truth ” discusses a case, his mode 
 of procedure is almost invariably the same. He 
 strives to demonstrate that the malady cured was 
 some hysterical manifestation. For this he gives no 
 
26 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 proof, but confines himself to doubtful hypotheses 
 and vague assertions, supported by such phrases 
 as “Who tells us that . . “This is without 
 doubt . . .,” “It is probable . . .,” “The affair must 
 have happened in this way . . .,” “I maintain 
 that . . .,” “I believe I have demonstrated . . 
 
 Finally, Dr. R-, in the name of truth, arrives 
 
 at the following wonderful conclusion: “ Since the 
 creation of Lourdes some two thousand sick have 
 recovered their health there, yet more than four 
 millions have come there uselessly . . . And these 
 four millions are the poo] that the heavens are 
 empty .” 
 
 It is not sufficient to build up a system on negation, 
 and to make hypotheses. Careful and conscientious 
 examinations cannot be replied to simply by assert¬ 
 ing “bad faith/’ “personal conviction.” Surely it 
 is a curious fact, how those who refuse to believe in 
 the supernatural never respect the opinions of those 
 who do, and at the same time are never silent about 
 it. They should understand that their action, far 
 from destroying belief in the miraculous, calls atten¬ 
 tion to it; by never ceasing to attack the super¬ 
 natural, they show how much importance they attach 
 to its manifestations. 
 
 Ill 
 
 If the archives of the Medical Bureau are consulted, 
 hundreds of medical signatures are to be seen, coming 
 from all countries, giving detailed and authentic 
 descriptions of the various cases. The names of 
 many distinguished in medicine may be seen there, 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 27 
 
 who have pronounced definitely as to the incurability 
 of certain cases, and thus have contributed definite 
 and exact scientific evidence. 
 
 So many independent medical witnesses coming 
 from various schools, the opinions of those most 
 highly qualified to judge, should, one would imagine, 
 afford sufficient guarantees. But this is by no means 
 the case. The witnesses are rejected at the outset, 
 the most formal attestations are thrown to one side, 
 the facts are judged from a distance, and all sorts of 
 theories are brought in, which will permit such inter¬ 
 pretations as the author desires; or the facts are 
 co-ordinated according to some rationalistic or 
 materialistic idea. 
 
 Is it credible that all doctors who believe should 
 discard their science, all competence of judgement, 
 and observation of facts, when they speak of what 
 they have seen themselves, and what they aver cannot 
 be explained according to the laws of science ? 
 
 Any sophism is apparently good enough to avoid 
 study and discussion: Here, for instance, is a 
 rapidly growing tumour, which ulcerates, is accom¬ 
 panied by induration of the glands, and which 
 recurs after removal, causing also that constitutional 
 change which is called cachexia. Such a tumour 
 presents clinically every indication that it is malig¬ 
 nant, and every doctor would declare that it is in¬ 
 curable. This growth is, however, cured suddenly 
 and completely at Lourdes: immediately dis¬ 
 cussion is refused; it is asserted that the tumour 
 was perfectly curable, and to avoid examination the 
 objectors shelter themselves behind absence of labora- 
 
28 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 tory examination, microscopic and radiographic 
 proof, etc. 
 
 Again, if the gravity and incurability of some 
 illness has been affirmed judicially on oath, after 
 evidence given by sworn experts, they reply that 
 Justice is no more infallible than Medicine. 
 
 If experts base their conclusion on the symptoms, 
 extent, and gravity of some disease, they reply that 
 errors of diagnosis are frequent, and always prob¬ 
 able ! But what is pathology based upon ? Surely 
 upon the descriptions given by observers of 
 symptoms, etc., which testify by their presence and 
 regularity to its authenticity. 
 
 When some disease is described by a doctor ac¬ 
 cording to methods which govern medical examina¬ 
 tions, the fact he announces cannot be denied with¬ 
 out also throwing doubt upon all clinical and patho¬ 
 logical work. 
 
 There are some maladies where the diagnosis may 
 be established absolutely positively, especially when 
 the disease is advanced. Such, for instance, are ad¬ 
 vanced cases of pulmonary tuberculosis. Even those 
 outside the medical profession can often recognise, 
 from the patient’s appearance, the nature, and to a 
 certain extent the duration, of the disease. 
 
 The doctor who can put forward an erroneous 
 diagnosis, when tubercular bacilli and tuberculous 
 lesions have been present for years, must be grossly 
 ignorant. The signs of advanced trouble with cavi¬ 
 tation in the lungs can be distinguished by means of 
 auscultation even by the student, and when these 
 are accompanied by fever, night sweats,, tubercle 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 29 
 
 bacilli in the sputum, loss of appetite and strength, 
 the diagnosis is certain, and the prognosis usually 
 fatal. 
 
 When the lung is destroyed, when a generalisation 
 of the tuberculous process has overcome the resistive 
 mechanisms of the body, suggestion or nervous shock 
 is incapable of replacing purulent and destroyed 
 tissues by healthy tissue. 
 
 At Lourdes, however, patients who arrive in the 
 last stage of phthisis, almost in their agony, sud¬ 
 denly declare themselves cured, and experience an 
 unaccustomed feeling of health. Those who had 
 been confined to bed for months suddenly rise and 
 commence to walk. Their dyspnoea has ceased, 
 giving place to full and normal respirations. Their 
 temperature has fallen, appetite returned. Ausculta¬ 
 tion, to start with, perhaps reveals still some slight 
 signs—impairment of resonance, a few rales; but the 
 principal signs have disappeared, the cavities are 
 repaired in a moment, and their cure is definitely 
 confirmed in a few days, sometimes a few hours, when 
 no lesion can be found and examination of the 
 sputum reveals no bacilli. 
 
 I give here a resume of the official notes of two 
 cures of pulmonary tubercle, where the return to 
 health took place just as I have described above. 
 The two patients had been treated, the one in both 
 military and civil hospitals, the other by several 
 practitioners of her native town. The details which 
 are given, indicating the nature and extent of the 
 disease and the completeness of the cure, seem to 
 me to offer all the necessary guarantees. 
 
30 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 I. LOUIS ThurEL, aged twenty-three , of Verdun. 
 Pulmonary tuberculosis. French National Pilgrim¬ 
 age, 1913. (Nos. 40 and 77 of the Register of 1913.) 
 
 Louis Thurel arrived at Lourdes on August 21, 
 I 9 I 3» with the French National Pilgrimage. His 
 papers were accompanied by the following certificate 
 from Dr. Guerin, physician to the hospital of Verdun : 
 
 “ I, the undersigned, certify that M. L. F. Thurel, 
 declared unfit for military service by reason of pul¬ 
 monary tuberculosis, presents the characteristic signs 
 of chronic bronchitis, accompanied by abundant 
 expectoration. He has lost much weight, and his 
 strength has much diminished. 
 
 “(Signed) Dr. Gu£rin. 
 
 “ Verdun, 
 
 “July 17,1913.” 
 
 It is frequently asserted with regard to Lourdes 
 that many of the cures possess certificates lacking 
 both accuracy and essential particulars. This can¬ 
 not be applied to this case, for in the “dossier” of 
 the patient there is an unassailable piece of evidence; 
 this is a certificate from the Military Examining Board 
 of Verdun, dated May 7, 1913, and this leaves no 
 doubt about the nature of the pulmonary lesions. In 
 the military hospital the patient had an evening 
 temperature of 38° to 39 0 C., a continual cough, much 
 insomnia, abundant expectoration, with numerous 
 bacilli in the sputum. 
 
 The gravity of the case is shown from the fact that 
 when he had been formally discharged, despite the 
 


THE FACTS 
 
 3 i 
 
 strictness of the military regulations on this head, 
 he had nevertheless to be retained in the wards of 
 the military hospital for three months, his state ab¬ 
 solutely precluding his transference to the civil 
 hospital. His transfer only took place on August I. 
 
 It was on March 25, 1913, that Louis Thurel 
 was admitted to the Regimental Infirmary with 
 the diagnosis of pleurisy on the left side. On 
 April 10 he was sent to the hospital with the diag¬ 
 nosis of “ dry pleurisy.” Soon definite signs of 
 tubercular trouble manifested themselves, and became 
 so serious that on May 7 he was invalided out of the 
 Army. It was in this very precarious condition that 
 the young man was admitted into the National Pil¬ 
 grimage train, bringing with him the certificate from 
 Dr. Guerin. The journey down to the Pyrenees was 
 very trying, and he arrived in a state of extreme 
 weakness. The dyspnoea was markedly increased. 
 He coughed so much, and respiration was so em¬ 
 barrassed, that it would have been impossible for him 
 to have made any further journey. 
 
 Directly on his arrival Louis Thurel was taken to 
 the Grotto. The coolness of the night air caused 
 some pain in his chest. He was immersed three 
 times in the water of the piscine, but felt only its icy 
 coldness. At the fourth immersion, however, the 
 water seemed to him to be agreeably warm; he was 
 able to say a prayer clearly and articulately; at the 
 same time he had an indefinable feeling of being 
 considerably better. On the following day, at the 
 Procession of the Blessed Sacrament, he experienced 
 an unusual interior sensation, which was followed by 
 
32 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 a feeling of health. When he returned to the hospital 
 he seemed unable to satisfy his appetite, to the great 
 amazement of his neighbours. On the following 
 morning everyone was surprised at the wonderful 
 change for the better in his appearance. At the 
 Medical Bureau on Sunday, August 24, the doctors 
 entrusted with his examination could find no altera¬ 
 tion of the respiratory rhythm, or any trace of lesion 
 on the right side. At the left there was slight dulness 
 at the apex, the breathing was a little harsh, but 
 without any dry or moist sounds. One of the doctors 
 present, a professor at the Medical Naval School, 
 who examined the patient, insisted on the fact that 
 signs of consolidation still existed at the left apex, 
 and watched very attentively as to what would be 
 the conclusion of the Bureau. 
 
 The following conclusions were adopted : 
 
 (1) Instantaneous disappearance of certain lesions 
 characteristic of phthisis in its third stage. 
 
 (2) No definite conclusion can be arrived at. 
 The patient must be seen later. 
 
 (3) If the healing process already commenced 
 progresses and maintains itself, it cannot be 
 attributed to a natural process. 
 
 Three months later, on November 30, at Paris, Dr. 
 de Grandmaison de Bruno, our excellent friend and 
 colleague, presented Louis Thurel at the annual Re¬ 
 union to an audience of five hundred assembled for 
 these “Assizes of the Faith”; the young man showed 
 absolutely no sign of any pulmonary lesion. 
 
 Distrustful of his own examination, Dr. Grand¬ 
 maison then asked one of his young colleagues there 
 
MLLE. JULIETTE NANCEY OF CHAUMONT 
 
 AUGUST 19, 1921. 
 
 (haute-marne), 
 
 mam 
 
 
 
 1 \ 
 
 mm 
 
 

 
 
 ■* *» 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 33 
 
 to examine the case. This gave similar results. The 
 report of Dr. Grandmaison was as follows : 
 
 “At the present time it is impossible, from the 
 physical signs, to say that Thurel has been or is now 
 tuberculous. He has gained seven kilogrammes in 
 weight since his discharge from the Army, and is 
 capable of undertaking walks of twenty miles or so. 
 These are not the signs of illness, and especially of 
 pulmonary tuberculosis.” 
 
 II. Juliette Nancey, aged thirty , of Chaumont 
 (Haute-Martie). Fulmonarytuberculosis. TheFrench 
 National Pilgrimage , 1921. (Dossier No. 19 of 1921.) 
 
 Mademoiselle Juliette Nancey has for the past 
 eleven years had tuberculous trouble in both lungs. 
 
 In 1910 she had some pulmonary congestion. In 
 1911 symptoms of tuberculous laryngitis presented 
 themselves, accompanied by haemoptysis. Her 
 medical attendant, Dr. Ripaut, then gave a very 
 gloomy prognosis, saying that there was little proba¬ 
 bility of her living more than six months. That 
 same year in the course of a pilgrimage to Lourdes, 
 the laryngeal trouble improved very considerably, 
 and the voice became normal. Soon, however, after 
 an attack of bronchitis, pleurisy appeared on both 
 sides of the chest. 
 
 In 1914 there was more haemoptysis, and the 
 patient’s life was despaired of. Following what 
 seemed to be a meningeal attack and an intestinal 
 haemorrhage, the Last Sacraments were administered. 
 
 Dr. Fenestre declared at this time that, outside a 
 miracle, recovery was hopeless. A severe enteritis 
 
 3 
 
34 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 now complicated the other troubles. In June, 1920, 
 Juliette Nancey had to take to her bed, and there 
 she remained until the day of her cure. She was 
 attacked with a specific bronchitis of both apices, 
 accompanied by haemoptysis. 
 
 The patient reached Lourdes on August 19, 1921, 
 with the 49th French National Pilgrimage. Her 
 weakness was then extreme, and she was almost un¬ 
 conscious. 
 
 Her papers contained the following two certificates : 
 
 (1) “Mademoiselle Nancey is suffering from active 
 tuberculosis, and has a lesion in the superior lobe of 
 the right lung; the tuberculosis has progressed slowly 
 during the last four years. She has spitting of blood, 
 progressive wasting, fever, loss of appetite, etc. 
 
 “(Signed) Dr. Malingre. 
 
 “Chaumont (Haute-Marne), 
 
 “ June 16, 1914." 
 
 (2) “Mademoiselle Nancey is suffering from a 
 chronic bronchitis of both apices. Her general health 
 is extremely feeble, necessitating continual rest in 
 bed. Cough, with slight expectoration, occasional 
 haemoptysis; complete absence of menstruation. 
 From the beginning of June, 1921, she has remained 
 almost totally oblivious to her surroundings. She is 
 fed with difficulty. It would seem that there are some 
 signs of a tuberculous meningitis. 
 
 (Signed) Dr. Weil. 
 
 “ Chaumont, 
 
 “ July 4, 1921.” 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 35 
 
 On August 19, at about five o’clock in the after¬ 
 noon, Juliette Nancey was carried to the piscine, in 
 the same semi-unconscious state. Suddenly she ex¬ 
 perienced a wonderful sensation of well-being, and 
 declared that she was cured. The drowsiness disap¬ 
 peared completely and suddenly; she was able to 
 respire deeply; and the menstruation, which had dis¬ 
 appeared for a year, was re-established painlessly 
 immediately after the bath. 
 
 At the Medical Bureau on August 21, her examina¬ 
 tion was entrusted to Dub^dat, of St Sever (Landes); 
 Rouquette, of Meze (Herault); Michelet, of Bor¬ 
 deaux; Coulange, of Marseilles; Turo, of Barce¬ 
 lona. 
 
 The following report was drawn up : 
 
 “ Lungs .—At the apex of the right lung, both 
 anteriorly and posteriorly, there is some ‘cog¬ 
 wheeled ’ respiration; otherwise the respirations are 
 normal. There is some slight dulness below the 
 clavicle. The voice-sounds in the scapular region are 
 normal. Left lung seems to be normal. 
 
 “Heart .—Beating rather forcibly and hurriedly, 
 under the influence of her emotion. No abnormal 
 sounds. 
 
 “ General Condition .—Temperature in the mouth, 
 36° C. Very marked wasting. The patient states 
 that she has considerable increase of appetite. No 
 more somnolence. Is in good spirits, and has a 
 feeling of health. During the examination, which 
 lasted an hour, there was no coughing or expectora¬ 
 tion.” 
 
 The report having been read before the doctors 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 36 
 
 present at the Bureau, the following conclusions were 
 unanimously adopted : 
 
 (1) The illness undoubtedly existed. 
 
 (2) There is an apparent cure. 
 
 (3) It will be necessary to wait, and make the final 
 conclusion in six months or a year. 
 
 On the following day, August 22, Juliette Nancey 
 returned to the Medical Bureau. There a fresh ex¬ 
 amination was made, and this showed that the cure 
 commenced the evening before had been completed in 
 less than twenty-four hours. 
 
 The slight dulness beneath the right clavicle had 
 completely disappeared. No abnormal signs were 
 discoverable and the respiration was the same on 
 both sides. 
 
 In consequence of this, the following conclusions 
 were adopted, and added to the notes of her case: 
 
 (1) The illness undoubtedly existed. 
 
 (2) There is a complete cure. 
 
 (3) This cure cannot be attributed to a natural 
 process. 
 
 In the course of the enquiry, however, the examin¬ 
 ing doctors, thinking that some points of the history 
 as given by Mademoiselle Nancey were not suffici¬ 
 ently clear, asked for further details from the doctors 
 whose certificates were contained in her notes. 
 
 Dr. Malingre replied “ that he had attended Made¬ 
 moiselle Nancey before the War for several abundant 
 hasmoptyses; she had a definite localised lesion of the 
 lung, which had also been attested by Dr. Mougeot, 
 who had seen her in consultation.” 
 
 Doctor Weil wrote on August 29: “ The terms of 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 37 
 
 the certificate which I wrote at the request of Made¬ 
 moiselle Nancey before her departure for Lourdes 
 were scrupulously correct.” 
 
 On July 15, 1922, the same doctor stated : 
 
 “ Mademoiselle Nancey’s health is satisfactory 
 from all points of view. Respiration is normal, and 
 the lung signs which were present during the first six 
 months of 1921 have disappeared. 
 
 “(Signed) Dr. Weil.” 
 
 In the two cures that I have just described it seems 
 to me that it would be difficult to combat either the 
 facts or the diagnosis: in both cases they had been 
 attested by many examinations made by different 
 medical men. 
 
 In the case of Louis Thurel, we have the hospital 
 evidence, in addition to that of the Army Examining 
 Board which gave him his discharge. With Juliette 
 Nancey we have for several years the evidence of 
 different practitioners. 
 
 At Lourdes the examinations were made by 
 medical men not attached to the Medical Bureau, 
 and simply designated to examine the cases because 
 they happened to be present. Their conclusions 
 were also adopted by the other doctors there. 
 
 In both cases some lesions were cured, and those 
 only partially so had totally disappeared either the 
 next day, or in a very few days. These results were 
 obtained in the case of patients who were much 
 emaciated, and giving evidence of a generalisation of 
 their tuberculous condition; that is to say, they were 
 in the worst possible condition for cure. 
 
38 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 It is, then, permissible to state, in these two cases, 
 whose medical histories I have retraced, that the 
 sudden return to a state of health surpasses the limits 
 of both nature and science. 
 
 IV 
 
 Science is unable to replace lungs excavated by 
 cavities, and infiltrated by tubercle, with healthy 
 lung tissue. It is true that in our time science has 
 made wondrous strides. Steam and electricity have 
 conquered distance, the microscope has unveiled the 
 secrets of life in the infinitely small, X-rays and 
 radium have produced astonishing results. Never¬ 
 theless, science has to halt before certain changes 
 effected in the human body, she is powerless to ex¬ 
 plain facts scientifically demonstrated, and sometimes 
 finds herself actually contradicted. With all her 
 resources she is incapable of annihilating instantane¬ 
 ously some lesion which has destroyed an organ; she 
 has never restored health and life to some consump¬ 
 tive almost at the last gasp. Facts such as these 
 have, however, taken place at Lourdes, and the divine 
 power continues to manifest itself there. Human 
 science, however perfect it may be, has never attained 
 such results. 
 
 Many cases of tubercle come to Lourdes every year 
 to implore their cure but are not healed. One case, 
 however, which presents lesions in the so-called third 
 stage, and is definitely cured in a few minutes, is a 
 proof of supernatural intervention. The statistics of 
 Lourdes contain not one but several such cases. 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 39 
 
 What doctor is there who can assert that he has cured 
 such a case ? 
 
 Certainly it is next to impossible to prove that 
 there is any organic lesion which with appropriate 
 remedies, careful treatment and time may not be 
 cured. It can nevertheless be asserted that, without 
 treatment, without that necessary factor of time, a 
 return to perfect health without passing through a 
 stage of convalescence is, materially speaking, im¬ 
 possible. In definite organic maladies of the stomach, 
 such as ulcer and cancer, the lack of food and the 
 abundant haemorrhages are promptly followed by 
 wasting and cachexia: the patients are emaciated to 
 the last degree, and have the aspect of veritable 
 skeletons. In such cases a speedy fatal termination 
 seems inevitable. Yet at Lourdes they have been 
 cured practically instantaneously. 
 
 We do not as yet know all the laws of Nature, but 
 at least this is certain : those we do know, Nature will 
 not contradict in the future. Tuberculosis in the last 
 stage and cancer are at present considered as incur¬ 
 able, but a time may come when, owing to the dis¬ 
 covery of some new remedy, some serum or vaccine, 
 we may even then cure these maladies. But actually 
 such a remedy has not been found, and the disap¬ 
 pearance of such a disease during the course of some 
 novena or pilgrimage constitutes a fact which is, 
 humanly speaking, inexplicable. Even should such 
 remedies be discovered, a sudden cure such as those 
 we have spoken of would be supernormal, because we 
 know that repair takes place according to definite 
 laws, and these laws demand a certain duration of 
 
40 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 time for the processes of nutrition and cell multiplica¬ 
 tion. 
 
 V 
 
 The adversaries of Lourdes assert that only 
 nervous cases are cured there. It is easy to refute 
 this assertion; we can demonstrate the cure of many 
 varieties of organic lesions, which have been subjected 
 to the most scrupulous enquiry both as to their diag¬ 
 nosis and sudden cure. “ The faith which cures ” can 
 only act suddenly in the case of functional nervous 
 maladies. Eighty out of a hundred cures at Lourdes 
 are organic lesions, in which suggestion and hypnosis, 
 even if they may aid in some cases the process of heal¬ 
 ing, yet can do comparatively little, and then need 
 a definite time. At Lourdes there are records of the 
 cure of pulmonary and osseous tuberculosis, of definite 
 organic lesions of the spinal cord, diseases of the optic 
 disc, etc. 
 
 Those who wish to make the nervous system ac¬ 
 countable for all the cures have great difficulty in 
 bringing various diseases into this category, and when 
 they are unable to do this they simply reject evidence 
 which does not coincide with their preconceived 
 notions and theories. If it is a question of tuber¬ 
 culous hip disease, or the cure of Pott’s disease of the 
 spine, what do our adversaries say then ? In spite of 
 the evidence, they make an appeal to nervous in¬ 
 fluences. It must have been a case of “nervous hip” 
 or spinal pain of an hysterical nature. But there are 
 cases of caries where the resulting suppuration tracks 
 down along the muscles, an abscess collects and dis¬ 
 charges externally; there are cases of hip disease 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 4i 
 
 accompanied by necrosis of the bone, where Astulae 
 communicate with the interior of the joint. 1 When 
 these cases are cured instantaneously, what sensible 
 man, who is loyal at the same time, will venture to 
 call such nervous cases ? 
 
 According to the recommendations of Pope Bene¬ 
 dict XIV, who did not wish that the term “ miracle ” 
 should be applied in the case of nervous subjects, it is 
 well known that at Lourdes we put on one side such 
 cases, observing a rigid silence in those in which there 
 might be some nervous influence. 
 
 At Lourdes we do undoubtedly see the instan¬ 
 taneous cure of functional disease, similar cases to 
 those seen in our hospitals, and at the Salpetriere: 
 some nervous paralysis suddenly disappears in the 
 piscine or during the passage of the Blessed Sacra¬ 
 ment, or someone recovers his speech after a long 
 interval. 
 
 Such cures as these our enemies seize upon, to sup¬ 
 port and bolster up their objections; but I repeat that 
 we do not take notice of them, we do not reckon such 
 in our statistics, these cases are never officially 
 published. 
 
 Cures of this kind, even if instantaneous and per¬ 
 manent, can never be regarded as certainly miracu¬ 
 lous. It may be that for the patient these cures are 
 great graces, but, medically speaking, we cannot 
 attribute them to a supernatural power, for they may 
 be caused naturally. 
 
 At times our statistics contain notes and references 
 
 1 Marguerite Chauvet, d’Alais. Right-sided hip disease with 
 fistulas. August 26, 1919. 
 
42 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 to nervous cases, but in these cases the patients have 
 been cured of definite organic maladies at the same 
 time. To be a sufferer from hysteria does not protect 
 from tuberculosis, cancer, or fracture of a limb. If in 
 a case of hysteria a tumour disappeared suddenly, a 
 fracture was consolidated in a few seconds, or ad¬ 
 vanced tuberculosis was suddenly cured, the fact is 
 certainly supernatural. We class them as such, 
 although taking care in the notes to mention the 
 hysterical symptoms. This is a matter of elementary 
 good faith, for it is obvious that all the cases which 
 manifest nervous symptoms cannot be rejected. 
 
 If the cure is purely functional, then no mention is 
 made of it. And yet, may there not be nervous 
 maladies of such gravity that the whole organism is 
 affected by them? Functional lesions that occasion 
 organic alterations before which Science is powerless ? 
 
 Those who wish to prove that all the maladies cured 
 at Lourdes are nervous cases have a definite end in 
 view, and that is to demonstrate that the subjects 
 favoured could have been perfectly cured naturally. 
 But it is far from the case that all these functional 
 nervous cases are easily cured. We all know, as a 
 matter of fact, that it is frequently very difficult. 
 
 There are, for example, nervous cases caused by 
 traumatism, by some great shock which the organism 
 has received; as a result the various bodily functions 
 and the whole economy suffer; such accidents often 
 cause illnesses which are almost incurable, and are often 
 followed by death. The cure of Gabriel Gargam is a 
 case in point. Here was a postal official badly injured 
 in a railway collision. Paralysis, followed by 
 
MLLE. ERNESTINE GUILLOTEAU OF TAILLIS (VENDfiE) 
 AT THE MOMENT OF HEALING, SEPTEMBER 8, 1908. 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 43 
 
 gangrene, had reduced him to a moribund condition; 
 yet suddenly, during the Procession of the Blessed 
 Sacrament, he raised himself, looking like a veritable 
 skeleton issuing from a tomb. A cure such as this is 
 contrary to all theories and all scientific prevision. 
 When the doctors tried to define the lesion, to settle 
 precisely what was the diagnosis of the malady which 
 had reduced him to such a state, they were sorely 
 embarrassed. Some talked of injury or compression 
 of the spinal cord, others attributed all the symptoms 
 to hystero-traumatism. “ What does it matter ?” said 
 Dr. Michaux, a well-known surgeon. “ The lesion was 
 everywhere, the whole organism affected. The precise 
 name of the disease is of little importance. The result 
 was certain, and death not far off .” 1 
 
 The moribund whom science had abandoned, and 
 who has come to life as a result of prayer, is, they tell 
 us, “ a nervous case.” Well and good. But that does 
 not explain the sudden passage from approaching 
 death to a state of health. Can one attribute to sug¬ 
 gestion, or the shock produced by the icy water, that a 
 skeleton with limbs almost deprived of muscles sud¬ 
 denly acquires normal movements? Will hypnosis 
 produce in a week a considerable increase of weight, 
 and cause a cure without convalescence or relapse ? 
 Yet these conditions are found in several cases cured 
 at Lourdes. They are well exemplified in that of 
 Mademoiselle Guilloteau, of Taillis, in the Vendee . 2 
 
 Mademoiselle Ernestine Guilloteau arrived at 
 Lourdes accompanied by accurate and precise certi- 
 
 1 Boissarie, Les Guerisons de Lourdes, 2nd sdrie, p. 42. 
 
 2 No. 90. Register, 1908. 
 
44 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 ficates stating that she was suffering from chronic 
 enteritis, to which were added symptoms of chronic 
 peritonitis. All the doctors had stated also that there 
 were lesions of the lungs, undoubtedly tuberculous in 
 character, and that, considering the generalisation of 
 the trouble and the extreme emaciation, her case was 
 incurable. When she arrived she was unable to walk, 
 having been absolutely confined to bed for two years. 
 She had extreme pain, which could only be calmed by 
 injections of morphia; of this she took 12 centi¬ 
 grammes daily. Her weakness was extreme, her 
 tongue covered with thrush, as happens with cachectics 
 in the last stage. In short, her state was so grave that 
 death appeared almost imminent. 
 
 However, during the passage of the Blessed Sacra¬ 
 ment, which a prelate was conveying to the Grotto 
 one morning at nine o’clock, this skeleton suddenly 
 raised herself. She was immediately taken to the 
 Medical Bureau. There they examined the poor girl, 
 finding that she weighed only 24 kilogrammes, 48 
 pounds instead of the 120 that she weighed two years 
 before. The doctors in the Bureau could find no 
 evidence of either abdominal or pulmonary tubercle. 
 She was cured, and thoroughly cured. For the last 
 few months as nourishment she had only been able to 
 take a little milk in small quantities, sometimes a little 
 tea or coffee, and this was not always retained; now 
 she could eat and digest everything. Formerly she 
 could not move without pain; now she could walk and 
 move without difficulty. What was very extraordinary 
 was that the movements almost seemed to be made 
 without muscles, for these had atrophied to such an 
 

 
 
 
 . 
 
 ■ 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 4 
 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 45 
 
 extent that they appeared almost non-existent. We 
 all know that time, and often a considerable time, is 
 necessary during which passive movements are made 
 in order to overcome the weakness and stiffness of 
 muscles which have been immobilised for some weeks, 
 as in the case of fractures or severe sprains. In the 
 case of Ernestine Guilloteau, immobilisation had 
 lasted for two years : during this time she had been 
 confined to bed, and the atrophy produced by this, 
 together with the wasting caused by the disease, had 
 reached an extreme degree. Nevertheless, scarcely 
 had she been cured by the passage of the Blessed 
 Sacrament, when she could move her legs normally— 
 a thing which had been impossible for the last two 
 years. Moreover, it must be noted that the muscles 
 and the fat in the subcutaneous tissues were restored 
 with a rapidity which was certainly abnormal. Three 
 weeks after the examination Ernestine Guilloteau had 
 gained 3 kilogrammes. Five months later, in April, 
 1909, she weighed, according to the evidence of her 
 doctor, 46^ kilogrammes. She returned to Lourdes 
 a year after in perfect health, having gained 66 
 pounds since the day of her return to life. In 1921 
 Mademoiselle Guilloteau presented herself at the 
 Bureau; her health was robust, and she was full of 
 spirits and energy, and this time she accompanied, 
 as a nurse, a patient who was seriously ill. 
 
 In the case of Mademoiselle Guilloteau it is impos¬ 
 sible to atribute the extreme wasting to a nervous 
 cause. There are cases, however, where without any 
 definite organic lesion the patients are very near 
 death. Hysteria is sometimes accompanied by such 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 46 
 
 symptoms that the whole organic life of the body 
 seems to be disorganised. In such a case, is a sudden 
 return to normal health of usual occurrence ? No! 
 such a resurrection must be attributed to some force 
 much superior to any that we can employ. The in¬ 
 fluence of the nervous system can put an end to some 
 special symptom, but it cannot instantly restore health 
 which had long been destroyed. There are hysterical 
 cases which by long years of suffering are reduced to 
 
 such a condition of ill-health that death is inevitable 
 and not far off. But at Lourdes such cases are some¬ 
 times restored to health in less time than it takes to 
 say it. 
 
 In the month of August, 1921, I had the occasion of 
 studying such a case. It was that of a young woman, 
 twenty-seven years of age, suffering from purely 
 functional nervous disease. For six years Made¬ 
 moiselle Pr- had been subject to intractable 
 
 vomiting; she rejected almost everything, even 
 liquids. In consequence she presented the appearance 
 of a veritable mummy, having literally only skin to 
 cover her bones, as the subjoined photograph indi¬ 
 cates. On the Rosary Esplanade during the Pro¬ 
 cession of the Blessed Sacrament, on August 25, 1921, 
 this living skeleton suddenly got up and commenced 
 to walk. Her walk, it is true, was decidedly hesitat¬ 
 ing, as in the case of one who has lost the power of 
 standing upright. That same evening she took a 
 copious and varied meal. 
 
 As she presented the stigmata of hysteria, and the 
 notes that accompanied her case stated that the 
 vomiting could not be attributed to any definite 
 
__ 
 
 MLLE. PR 
 
 AUGUST 20, 1921. 
 

 u 
 
 *< 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ; 
 
 ~ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 47 
 
 organic lesion in the stomach, the doctors at the 
 Bureau certified that the case was certainly one of 
 extraordinary improvement, but in the absence of any 
 definite organic lesion such a change might be at¬ 
 tributed to some nervous shock, some emotion or 
 psychic influence, and so might have a natural cause. 
 As always happens in such cases, the patient was 
 classed as hysterical, and simply looked upon as a 
 pathological curiosity. It is none the less true that 
 
 the sudden change effected in Mademoiselle Pr- 
 
 was not only the cure of the nervous symptoms, but 
 a profound change in her general health which was 
 difficult to explain naturally. 
 
 In such cases it is not the cessation of the nervous 
 symptoms, the pain, paralysis, contraction, etc., which 
 constitutes the unusual; it is the sudden change, the 
 brusque amelioration of the former morbid state. It 
 is necessary to draw a distinction between the general 
 state of health and the nervous symptoms. 
 
 Instantaneous cures of grave lesions without any 
 relapse are sufficient reply to the sophisms of those 
 who wish to explain- all the cures at Lourdes by sug¬ 
 gestion. La Grivotte , whom Zola interred as far 
 back as 1892, survived him : she only died on August 
 11, 1920. Sophie Couteau, another heroine of Zola’s, 
 who was cured of caries of the bones of the foot, is 
 now Sister Agnes of the Little Sisters of the Assump¬ 
 tion ; she has always remained well. Marie Le- 
 marchand, the Elise Roquet of the novelist, became 
 Madame Authier; she had a family of ten children, 
 and brought them up as excellent Catholics. 
 
 Zola’s bad faith and the lies he told about the 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 48 
 
 cures he had witnessed have had a result diametric¬ 
 ally opposite to that which the novelist desired. Per¬ 
 haps his book and the details he has given about the 
 three persons we have mentioned may have upset the 
 convictions of some and caused doubts in the minds 
 of others; but, on the whole, the result of this work 
 has been to call the attention of numbers to Lourdes 
 and the cures that are worked there. His work has 
 led to our sanctuaries many doctors and men of 
 science. The impious attempt of the novelist has in 
 the long run increased both the evidence for the super¬ 
 natural and the glory of God. 
 
 VI 
 
 It can be easily understood that the enemies of 
 Lourdes, in order to explain the facts, made much 
 use of the term suggestion . 
 
 The word “ suggestion ” dispensed embarrassing 
 questions from being investigated; it permitted a 
 solution being found without study or discussion; 
 the supernatural was denied by entrenching behind 
 so-called infallible science. “ It is a case of hysteria, 
 of suggestion.” This was supposed to be the final 
 verdict of science, and these words, mysterious to the 
 lay mind, having even a vague, ill-defined meaning to 
 those who had not specialised in nervous diseases, 
 closed the subject, rendering further investigation 
 superfluous. 
 
 By affirming suggestion, this so-called science runs 
 counter to its own theories. If all the cures at Lourdes 
 are of psychic origin and depend upon suggestion, 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 49 
 
 why does suggestion work such wonderful works at 
 Lourdes only after the apparitions of 1858, and 
 always in conjunction with fervent prayer ? If all 
 the sick who are cured at Lourdes are neurotic, how 
 is it that we only obtain a limited number of cures 
 amongst the great number of such cases which they 
 allege are present there ? 
 
 Again, if we possess at the Grotto such exceptional 
 means of suggestion, how is it that at the Bureau we 
 inscribe in our archives cures of pulmonary, osseous, 
 and articular tuberculosis; of cancer, blindness, etc.— 
 maladies where suggestion can do little or nothing; 
 cases, too, which are easily controlled ? 
 
 Those who obstinately deny our cures and refuse 
 discussion are impossible to convince. They will not 
 accept the evidence of facts. The followers of the 
 suggestion hypothesis are, at least, adversaries whom 
 we may try to refute. 
 
 Suggestion, imagination, nervous influences, have 
 never possessed the property of regenerating organic 
 tissue. I have already referred to the laws which 
 govern these changes. Such reparation can only occur 
 after a definite time, by successive changes, by means 
 of cell multiplication. This multiplication, caused by 
 the older cells and in conjunction with them, reforms 
 the skin, muscles, connective tissue, bones, etc. All 
 these tissue changes are brought about by means of 
 material conveyed by the blood, which had obtained 
 them from the food by complicated digestive pro¬ 
 cesses. In this succession of physiological operations 
 the question of time is an indispensable one. This is 
 an unalterable law. To assert that an emotion, a 
 
 4 
 
50 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 moral shock, can create cells of all the necessary 
 varieties, is to admit heresy. 
 
 It is possible that imagination may modify to some 
 extent the laws which preside over the regeneration of 
 tissues, but it cannot run absolutely counter to these 
 laws; that would be to deny firmly established bio¬ 
 logical principles. 
 
 Here is a spring, without medicinal qualities, which 
 puts an end to phthisis, the various manifestations of 
 the tuberculous diathesis, to cancer, etc., and the 
 action of this water is practically instantaneous. 
 These cures occur in those full of faith and confidence, 
 also in those who do not believe, and have not asked 
 to be cured. Is it reasonable, then, to attribute the 
 curative effect of Lourdes water to the exaltation pro¬ 
 duced by faith and the influence of suggestion ? 
 
 Children of only a few months or years cannot be 
 cured by suggestion; they cry, scream, and struggle 
 when they are plunged into the icy water. Can we 
 believe that they are under the influence of the “ faith 
 which cures,” and that they suggest to themselves 
 the idea of a cure ? It is the same with those unfor¬ 
 tunate patients who depart from Lourdes as ill as they 
 arrived. Are they still under the influence of sugges¬ 
 tion when sometimes their malady is cured during the 
 return journey in the train or when they reach home ? 
 
 I will cite an example of one of these cures which 
 was obtained beyond the influence of those inter¬ 
 mediary agents to which cure is usually assigned, a 
 cure which took place when all suggestion or hope of 
 cure was non-existent. 
 
 It occurred in the case of a young woman belonging 
 
MLLE. IRENE SALIN OF MOURIES (BOUCHES DU RHONE), 
 
 AUGUST 
 
 
 1921. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 5 i 
 
 to the Pilgrimage of Provence. Despite her great 
 desire to be cured, she left Lourdes without any signs 
 of amelioration. As is usually the case, she was calm, 
 resigned, and submissive, but confident in spite of 
 everything. Her firm trust in our blessed Lady, how¬ 
 ever, was that she would finally yield to her prayers 
 and supplications, and cure her another year on the 
 occasion of a new pilgrimage. 
 
 Mademoiselle Ir£ne Salin, aged twenty-one y of 
 Mouries (Bouches-du-Rhone ). (Dossier No. 24, 
 1921.) 1 Pott's disease cured during the return 
 journey . 
 
 To obtain permission to join the 49th National 
 Pilgrimage, Mademoiselle Irene Salin presented the 
 following certificate from Dr. Pierre Cot, of Maus- 
 sanne (Bouches-du-Rhone): 
 
 “ I, the undersigned, Pierre Cot, doctor of the 
 Faculty of Montpellier, living at Maussanne, declare 
 and certify that I have had under my care for two 
 years Mademoiselle Irene Salin, suffering from Pott’s 
 disease in the lumbar region. Actually the patient 
 presents evidence of disease in the last three lumbar 
 vertebras, with persistent pain in the whole of that 
 region. She has to wear a plaster corset, after almost 
 two years of the ‘gouttiere.’ Improvement is very 
 slow. 
 
 “ (Signed) Dr. Cot. 
 
 “ July 4, 1921.” 
 
 1 Journal de la Grotle , December 4, 1921. 
 
1 
 
 
 52 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 In delivering this certificate, our colleague did not 
 conceal from her family the dangers that might pos¬ 
 sibly occur from a journey to Lourdes. “ As a matter 
 of fact,” he said, “ this patient ought not to be moved, 
 and the proof is that I refused her visiting her father 
 at Salon. However, in face of the express wish of the 
 patient, and her great hopes of being cured, I have 
 allowed her to undertake the journey. I, however, 
 make one precaution, a sine qua non —Mademoiselle 
 Irene must be transported swung in her ‘ gouttiere * to 
 Arles, where she joins the pilgrimage train. There 
 again, if it is in any way possible, she must be trans¬ 
 ported in the same manner. I affirm, speaking as a 
 medical man, that she should not travel otherwise.” 
 The doctor also added that he could not allow the 
 patient to remove her plaster splint for immersion in 
 the piscine. 
 
 Despite all the precautions, Mademoiselle Salin 
 suffered very much during the journey to Lourdes. 
 On her arrival on Thursday, August 18, 1921, she 
 was taken to the Hospital of St. Frais, the slightest 
 shock causing very considerable pain. 
 
 Some hours later she was completely immersed in 
 the piscine, but after this only local applications of 
 the water were made, as the movements involved in 
 the immersion were too painful. On August 22, how¬ 
 ever, the evening before her departure, the formal 
 wish of the patient was granted that she should again 
 be bathed, and this wish was granted without any 
 result ensuing. 
 
 On Tuesday, August 23, the train for Provence left 
 Lourdes, taking Mademoiselle Salin, uncured, but 
 
 j 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 53 
 
 fully resigned to the will of God, and still confident. 
 “ The blessed Virgin will cure me, you will see,” she 
 said, and this she repeated several times, but by this 
 she only intended to say that she hoped to be cured 
 the following year when she returned to Lourdes a 
 second time. 
 
 As the train approached Toulouse she suddenly 
 felt better, and asked permission of her mother to 
 leave her splint and take some steps in the corridor 
 of the carriage. This was granted, and Mademoiselle 
 Salin walked a little without feeling any pain or 
 fatigue. Replaced in her splint, she slept soundly 
 until her arrival at Montpellier; for three years she 
 had not slept like this. 
 
 The following morning, August 24, on arriving at 
 Nimes, Irene jumped from her compartment, and 
 visited some friends in an adjoining carriage, 
 mounting again into her own compartment with¬ 
 out help, even though she was wearing her plaster 
 corset. 
 
 At Arles she got out, followed by her “ gouttiere,” 
 which was carried behind her, and seated herself in 
 the vehicle which was to convey her the 25 kilometres 
 which separated her from Mouries. 
 
 During this journey her carriage was passed by the 
 car of Dr. Cot, who was absolutely stupefied to 
 see his patient without her splint, asserting that she 
 was cured. 
 
 On Friday, August 26, our colleague visited the 
 patient at home : at her request he removed the splint, 
 and testified to the absolute disappearance of every 
 morbid symptom. 
 
54 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 Three weeks later, on September 14, Dr. Cot drew 
 up the following declaration : 
 
 “ Mademoiselle Irene Salin, aged twenty-one, suffer¬ 
 ing from Pott’s disease in the lumbo-sacral region, 
 was put in a Bonnet’s splint from March, 1919, to 
 June, 1920; then, as painful symptoms still persisted 
 and walking was impossible, a plaster corset was 
 applied, which she wore from April 5, 1921, to 
 August 26 of the same year. 
 
 “At that date I removed the plaster corset, and 
 state, that then Mademoiselle Salin presented none of 
 the classical signs of Pott's disease. The movements 
 of antero- and postero-flexion of the spine, as well as 
 the lateral movements, were perfectly free and pain¬ 
 less. The patient walked without pain, and felt no 
 fatigue therefrom. 
 
 “I am obliged to avow , with all the impartiality 
 which certificates of this kind ought to have, that it is 
 impossible to explain otherwise than super naturally 
 such a complete and rapid cure. 
 
 “ As a testimony to which I have given the present 
 certificate. 
 
 “(Signed) Dr. Cot.” 
 
 The illness from which Mademoiselle Salin suffered 
 was undoubtedly Pott’s disease. The diagnosis was 
 confirmed by Dr. Jourdain, of Marseilles, who advised 
 the Bonnet splint. The same diagnosis was made by 
 Dr. Eynard, of Marseilles, after a radiograph had 
 been taken. Finally, when the “gouttiere” was 
 removed Drs. Bee and Tartanssen of Airgnon applied 
 the plaster corset. 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 55 
 
 The affection, then, from which Mademoiselle Salin 
 suffered was attested by five doctors , who based their 
 opinion upon the radio graphic proof. 
 
 The evidence of the first certificate, followed by the 
 detailed report of the patient made by the doctor 
 treating the case, permit us, then, to affirm the cure, 
 which has since been completely maintained. The 
 rapidity of the cure authorises us to affirm that it 
 cannot be explained medically. The circumstances in 
 which it was produced preclude nervous influences. 
 
 At the Procession on the Rosary Esplanade, and 
 before the Grotto, without the action of any inter¬ 
 mediary agent, we see the instantaneous cure of 
 organic lesions, wounds, fractures, caries, tumours, 
 just as in the piscines. It is well recognised to-day 
 that suggestion cannot produce similar results. 
 
 Charcot, despite his confidence in the “faith which 
 cures ” (a faith which, however, never cured a cancer 
 before the appearance of the miraculous spring at 
 Lourdes), admits absolutely that tissue lesions, lesions 
 with loss of substance, require a definite time, varying 
 in length, for their cure. 
 
 The chief of the Nancy School, Bernheim himself, 
 recognised that suggestion has limits in its power of 
 action. He acknowledged that suggestion could not 
 act directly on a diseased organ “ to restore the 
 elements of a tissue either destroyed or invaded by 
 a new growth,” and declared that hypno-suggestive 
 treatment only succeeded in a very limited number of 
 cases. 
 
 According to Babinsky, we must doubt as to many 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 56 
 
 of the symptoms which were formerly regarded as 
 hysterical. “All medical men recognise that the 
 domain of hysteria has been inordinately extended, 
 and that the power of hysteria to reproduce the most 
 diverse maladies has been considerably exaggerated.” 1 
 
 According to this author, grave errors of diagnosis 
 are frequently made, by considering as hysterical 
 symptoms which are those of definite organic trouble. 
 Haemoptyses, haematemeses, haematuria, fever—all 
 these symptoms have been observed in hysterical 
 subjects, and considered as hysterical by skilful prac¬ 
 titioners, who discovered later that these symptoms 
 were definitely organic. To-day “ it is recognised 
 that circulatory , secretory , trophic troubles , as well as 
 hcemorrhages and anuria , cannot be produced solely 
 by suggestion.” 2 
 
 If this is true, then the haematemesis which char¬ 
 acterises ulcer of the stomach cannot be regarded as 
 a neurosis, and the many cases of this affection cured 
 at Lourdes cannot be attributed to suggestion, any 
 more than the cures of other organic lesions of which 
 our archives contain such a number. 
 
 We are told that the settings of the stage at Lourdes 
 —the candles, the invocations, the various ceremonies 
 —exert a curative influence which explains all the 
 supernatural happenings. To this we reply, that the 
 adversaries of the supernatural can, if they are so 
 minded, imitate all this. They can invoke Nature 
 the omnipotent, light candles, and make magnificent 
 
 1 Demembrement de VhysUrie tradUionelle. Pithiaiisme , p. 4. 
 Imprimerie de la Semaine MJdicale. 
 
 3 Babinsky, ibid., p. 12. 
 

THE FACTS 5 7 
 
 processions in their hospitals and asylums; still, they 
 will never obtain similar results. 
 
 It is asserted that all the sick cured at Lourdes are 
 hysterical or neurotic. It must be admitted, however, 
 that a very special dose of good-will is necessary to 
 include in such categories the cases of Louis Thurel, 
 Juliette Nancey, and Ernestine Guilloteau, whose notes 
 we have given. 
 
 Neurotic cavities in the lungs have yet to be dis¬ 
 covered, and hysteria has not yet produced fractures, 
 tubercular joint disease, and cancer. 
 
 It must be admitted that it is difficult to see “ sug¬ 
 gestion ” in the following sudden and radical cure, 
 which I published in the month of June, 1921 : 1 
 
 Mademoiselle Valentine Gougaud, of Rennes, 
 aged twenty-seven . ('Register No. 7, 1921.)—From 
 
 infancy she had very poor health; amongst her ail¬ 
 ments tuberculous manifestations figure prominently. 
 She has had pneumonia, broncho-pneumonia, pleurisy, 
 frequent attacks of bronchitis, meningitic symptoms, 
 scarlet fever, influenza, appendicitis, with peritoneal 
 trouble. 
 
 With such a history it is easy to understand that 
 this young girl had little strength, and yet, despite 
 her marked wasting, Mademoiselle Gougaud, im¬ 
 mediately there was any amelioration in her health, 
 recommenced her work. She continued as long as 
 possible in her work in a grocery establishment, and 
 when this was impossible took the post of cashier in 
 another situation. After her operation for appendicitis 
 
 1 Journal de la Grotte, June 19, 1921. 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 58 
 
 in 1916, Mademoiselle Gougaud commenced to have 
 much pain in the left hip; this necessitated a long rest 
 in the country, when she was either lying in bed or on 
 a long invalid chair. 
 
 At Rennes the diagnosis of coxalgia was made, and 
 she was sent to the Roskoff Institute. The diagnosis 
 was here confirmed, and an immobilising plaster splint 
 applied, which was worn for eight months. During 
 the two following months the treatment consisted in 
 baths and extension by the aid of a weight of 5 kilo¬ 
 grammes. This treatment led to some improvement, 
 but the patient was not allowed to sit up or to bend 
 the knee. 
 
 Despite her precarious condition, she recommenced 
 work in the beginning of 1918, and continued until 
 October. 
 
 During that month she had a grave attack of 
 broncho-pneumonia, which incapacitated her for six 
 weeks. At the end of this attack she had considerable 
 pain in the cervico-dorsal region of the spine. How¬ 
 ever, she recommenced work in December, suffering 
 much pain in the hip and spine; at the same time she 
 could not hold herself upright, and was unable to 
 raise the head. After treatment by cauterisation along 
 the length of the vertebral column, Dr. Augier, the 
 patient’s medical man, who was chief surgeon at the 
 Hospital and Clinic of St. Yves, at Rennes, showed 
 her to several colleagues at the hospital, and also to 
 six practitioners, three of whom were surgeons. The 
 diagnosis of Pott’s disease was confirmed, and the 
 advice given that the patient should enter the hospital 
 and an immobilising apparatus be applied. 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 59 
 
 In July, 1919, Mademoiselle Gougaud entered the 
 hospital at St Yves, and was immediately put in a 
 plaster corset, which was left on for two months. At 
 the end of this time, loss of consciousness, vomiting, 
 and meningitic symptoms occurred, for which ice was 
 applied to the head. When the patient was a little 
 better from this, she had a very violent pain in the 
 cervical region. 
 
 After a month and a half a third change of the 
 plaster corset was made. The slightest movement of 
 the body now caused intense pain; her sufferings were 
 so acute that injections of morphia had to be given 
 for their relief. 
 
 The journey to Lourdes was made in June, 1921. 
 The getting the patient into the train, and also the 
 journey, caused much pain. In addition to the spinal 
 disease, there was much pain in the left knee, which 
 could not be flexed at all. 
 
 Mademoiselle Gougaud arrived at Lourdes on 
 June 14 with the following certificate : 
 
 “Mademoiselle Valentine Gougaud, who has been 
 under my care for the last two years, is suffering from 
 Pott’s disease of the cervical spine, which has neces¬ 
 sitated the application of a plaster corset. At the 
 present time the disease is in active progress, and the 
 general health is very precarious. 
 
 “(Signed) Dr. AUGIER. 
 
 “ Rennes, 
 
 “April 5, 1921.” 
 
 On Wednesday, June 15, at nine o’clock in the 
 morning, at the moment when the apparatus was 
 removed to allow of her immersion, she had much 
 
6o 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 pain, and at the same time a strange sensation of 
 collapse; then, without knowing exactly how, she 
 raised herself in the water. 
 
 From this moment all pain and suffering disap¬ 
 peared. However, the apparatus was re-applied, and 
 Mademoiselle Gougaudwas taken to the Grotto, where 
 she felt herself to be very much better; but she did 
 not wish to declare herself cured, deciding that she 
 would not definitely believe in it until she was able 
 to walk. 
 
 In the afternoon at the second bath she did not 
 experience any pain, but felt a great sense of well¬ 
 being; in addition, her knee, which had been rigidly 
 extended, was capable of flexion. 
 
 A little later, at the Procession, she was much 
 agitated and moved, but persevered in her resolution 
 not to say anything as to the disappearance of her 
 symptoms, from fear that perhaps after all her cure 
 was not a real one. 
 
 At the hospital that evening Mademoiselle Gougaud 
 sat without difficulty on the edge of her bed; to shake 
 hands with one of her neighbours she walked with 
 assistance to her, then with the help of one of the 
 Religious she made the tour of the ward, greeting the 
 various patients. After this she had strength enough 
 to rise again and greet the director of the pilgrimage. 
 She then made an excellent meal, the first for many 
 months, for up to this time she had only been able to 
 take milk by means of a feeding-cup, the daily amount 
 being scarcely a litre (a pint and a half). She passed 
 a very good night, not having taken, as she always 
 had done previously, some cachets of chloral, without 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 61 
 
 which she had been unable to sleep. On Thursday 
 morning, June 16, Mademoiselle Gougaud was con¬ 
 ducted to the Bureau, where she raised herself easily 
 from her stretcher, and walked without assistance, 
 hesitating, however, a little like one who has lost the 
 habit of walking. 
 
 Her examination at the Bureau was entrusted to 
 Drs. Petitpierre, of Hyeres, and Firoult, of Rennes, 
 who gave the following report: 
 
 "(i) The vertebral column shows no deformity in 
 the cervical region. All the movements are made with 
 ease and without pain. There is no muscular con¬ 
 traction. 
 
 “ (2) The left knee shows no deformity. Flexion is 
 incomplete, and just passes the right angle. 
 
 “ (3) There is some slight pain in the left hip on 
 flexing the thigh on the pelvis, and this flexion is 
 arrested at 110 degrees. The movement of adduction 
 has half its amplitude, and is not painful. 
 
 “ (4) The shortening of the left leg, which accord¬ 
 ing to the witnesses interrogated was 2 \ centimetres, 
 is only apparent and due to a bending of the vertebral 
 column. 
 
 “(5) Despite the history of lung trouble, respiration 
 is normal. There are no rales or other adventitious 
 signs. Percussion shows normal resonance. 
 
 “ Conclusions: 
 
 " (1) The illness has really existed. 
 
 “ (2) There is an absolute cure of the Pott’s disease 
 in the cervical region, and an evident amelioration of 
 the hip disease. 
 
62 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 “(3) The cure, considering its rapidity, cannot be 
 attributed to a natural process.” 
 
 P.S.—At the examination made on the following 
 day, Friday, June 17, the coxalgia was much im 
 proved. The movements of the hip were normal. 
 The only thing remaining was that the left knee could 
 not be completely flexed. 
 
 This case of Mademoiselle Gougaud seems to me 
 to rest on a base which is scientifically impregnable. 
 The diagnosis of vertebral caries made by the surgeon 
 of the hospital, whose competence cannot be doubted, 
 was also confirmed by six other doctors, three of 
 whom were surgical specialists; and it was also con¬ 
 firmed by a radiograph. At the Bureau the disap¬ 
 pearance of all the symptoms was attested. 
 
 This is not all, however. Dr. Augier, who had her 
 under his charge in the Hospital and Clinic of 
 St Yves for three years, and who examined her before 
 her departure for Lourdes, did not lose sight of her 
 after the cure. He followed it attentively, obtained 
 new radiographs, and published in the Semaine 
 Religietise of the Diocese of Rennes (February 18) the 
 following account: 
 
 “ Mademoiselle Gougaud was cured at Lourdes on 
 June 15, 1921, of a grave affection of the vertebral 
 column which had lasted for two years. All the 
 doctors who had seen the patient from the time of her 
 entry at the Hospital of St Yves declared that she 
 was suffering from Pott’s disease of the cervical spine. 
 This was also my opinion, which was confirmed by 
 the facts noticed during two years’ treatment. When 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 63 
 
 she left for Lourdes, I gave her a certificate, but 
 purposely said nothing of the hip disease from which 
 she had suffered, but had been cured for some time, 
 some lameness being left with marked stiffness of the 
 left hip and knee. 
 
 “ Scarcely had the patient returned to Rennes cured, 
 when people began to question the diagnosis before 
 me, even going so far as to say that she suffered only 
 from a nervous affection. 
 
 “ My personal conviction, both as to the diagnosis 
 of the disease and its cure, was quite definite. In face, 
 however, of the criticisms that had been formulated, 
 I resolved to observe the patient closely for another 
 six months, at the expiration of which the cure would 
 have been tested by time. 
 
 “ I imposed silence on the patient, and also on the 
 Religious who had nursed her. For myself this 
 silence was very trying, seeing the erroneous inter¬ 
 pretations which had been put upon the cure. 
 
 “To-day, after six months, my conclusions are as 
 follows: 
 
 “(1) Mademoiselle Gougaud has remained ab¬ 
 solutely cured for six months. There is no sign of 
 any disease of the vertebral column, and the radio¬ 
 graph shows complete integrity of the cervical region. 
 
 “ (2) The stiffness of the hip and knee has dis¬ 
 appeared. There only remains very slight limitation 
 of movement and lameness. 
 
 “ (3) I have never noticed in this patient any signs 
 of functional nervous trouble. 
 
 “(Signed) DR.AUGIER. 
 
 “December 15, 1921." 
 
64 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 Are not these observations satisfactory ? They 
 embrace notes, verifications, and continued observa¬ 
 tion, which destroy absolutely the hypothesis of sug¬ 
 gestion in this cure. 
 
 As a matter of fact, at the present day the legend 
 of nervous cures at Lourdes ought to be abandoned, 
 for it is upheld only by the ignorant, or by opponents 
 who are in bad faith. But if little by little the theory 
 of suggestion has been abandoned, it is the fashion 
 now to explain the cures at Lourdes naturally by the 
 intervention of “unknown forces” of Nature. The 
 objection of unbelievers now is that, before concluding 
 that it is God who has, for example, cured a fracture 
 instantaneously, we must be certain that there do not 
 exist natural forces which are capable of producing 
 this wonderful result. But if this is the case, one can 
 never be sure of anything! When I prescribe some 
 remedy for a patient of mine, I have the certainty that 
 in the ordinary dose it will not cause harm, and will 
 produce a certain definite effect, because this remedy, 
 according to experience, always produces the same 
 results. But if this were not the case, what would not 
 be my hesitation and apprehension, if I imagined that 
 it might produce effects according to some unknown 
 law, capable perhaps of doing exactly the contrary of 
 what happens ordinarily, and so gravely compromis¬ 
 ing the life of my patient ? If such a thing did 
 happen, it would certainly be a derogation from 
 natural law, and I should be perfectly correct in 
 describing it as extra-natural. 
 
 Again, nothing, absolutely nothing, authorises us to 
 admit the hypothesis of natural forces which we shall 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 65 
 
 only learn about at some future date. The structure 
 of the organs of the human body, and of the functions 
 which preside over these organs, has never changed, 
 and never will change. Structure and function are 
 presided over by immutable laws. Other laws cannot 
 possibly come and change the normal structure or 
 function of the bodily organism. 
 
 It is true that there are still discoveries which 
 demonstrate that Science has not yet said its last 
 word. But what we call laws, definite conclusions 
 drawn from the results of experience, are immutable. 
 It cannot possibly be admitted that at some future 
 date some discovery shall overturn our knowledge of 
 to-day, for that has never happened since the world 
 has been a world. If some new law were capable of 
 destroying some old law, this would also be the 
 destruction of the sciences of chemistry, physics, and 
 mechanics. We shall find, perhaps, unknown forces 
 which will enable us to understand phenomena up to 
 now inexplicable, but the new laws which gradually 
 become known will not contradict the old ones. A 
 natural force so far unknown was revealed to us in 
 the discovery both of radium and X-rays. But how 
 has this changed the old law that luminous rays com¬ 
 ing from the sun cannot traverse opaque bodies ? 
 Some new law will never give this power to solar rays. 
 Nothing can do violence to Nature, whose laws seem 
 at times harsh and pitiless. Against these natural 
 laws Science is powerless, but what Science is incap¬ 
 able of doing is easily possible to the omnipotence of 
 the Creator, who at Lourdes totally reverses at times 
 these natural laws. 
 
 5 
 
66 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 Moreover, those who invoke unknown forces, do 
 not they themselves acknowledge that, by employing 
 this term to avoid the supernatural, they precisely 
 recognise that the cures at Lourdes are produced out¬ 
 side the laws of Nature? We do not say any¬ 
 thing else when we affirm the possibility of the 
 “ miraculous.” 
 
 Let us admit for one moment that there may be some 
 unknown force or forces which produce the extraor¬ 
 dinary effects that are seen at Lourdes. These forces 
 would necessarily in their origin and mode of action 
 operate so that experience would show that they 
 invariably produced the same results. Well, then, I 
 argue that this force, which as yet we do not know, 
 but which exists, has the power by means of the water 
 of the piscines to cure a case of suppurating disease 
 of the hip-joint. But if it is a definite law that 
 governs this unknown force, then surely other cases 
 of suppurating disease of the hip-joint ought to be 
 cured with immersion in the miraculous water and 
 with similar prayers. 
 
 As a matter of fact, cures of the most diverse 
 maladies occur in the water at Lourdes, but at the 
 unexpected moment, and without the slightest regu¬ 
 larity. It is the same at the Procession; the same 
 with matter-of-fact adults; the same with young 
 children, where suggestion has no part. 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 67 
 
 VII 
 
 It is also evident that cures occur at Lourdes which 
 at first sight seem from their rapidity to be extra¬ 
 ordinary, but which nevertheless present no miracu¬ 
 lous character. God can cure a disease at any stage 
 of its manifestations. But there are cases where the 
 return to health has been an exceptional grace, a 
 favour accorded to fervent prayer without the cure 
 being necessarily miraculous from the medical point 
 of view y and this because it presents nothing contrary 
 to the findings of Science nor the laws of Nature. 
 Such cures can be obtained elsewhere than at the 
 Grotto of Lourdes. The surrounding crowds, how¬ 
 ever, in presence of what seem to them surprising facts, 
 give them an exaggerated importance, and much too 
 quickly regard them as supernatural. The doctors, 
 however, cannot consider or declare them to be such, 
 because it is impossible to affirm scientifically that the 
 cure could not have taken place in some other place 
 at some other time and without any supernatural 
 intervention. 
 
 Here, for instance, is a patient whose treatment has 
 been rest in bed for several months. This prolonged 
 immobilisation has made the various functional 
 symptoms gradually disappear. Naturally the time 
 arrives when the patient is free from the symptoms, 
 and is perfectly capable of getting up and walking. 
 Nothing, however, has given this certitude, and she 
 continues to remain in bed, firmly convinced that it 
 is impossible to make the necessary effort. At 
 Lourdes, however, suddenly under the influence of 
 
68 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 emotion this effort is made. The patient rises and 
 pronounces the words which all are desirous to hear: 
 “ I am cured.” Immediately great excitement takes 
 place around her—an excitement it is necessary to 
 have witnessed to have an idea of. “A miracle! A 
 miracle ! Hosanna ! Hosanna !” cries the crowd. 
 
 At such a moment nobody wishes to think that the 
 patient is deceived, and that she takes her ardent 
 wish for a cure as a genuine reality. Consequently, 
 when the calmer medical men examine the case, and 
 pronounce that a definite opinion cannot be passed 
 without further enquiry, or perhaps state that the cure 
 or amelioration is susceptible of a natural explanation, 
 immediately the crowd shows signs of disapproval. 
 Noisy protestations are made by those who believed 
 and said that the patient had been miraculously cured. 
 
 The patient could not walk—she walks. This 
 child was dumb—and talks now. This man was 
 blind—he sees. This paralysed woman has recovered 
 the complete use of her limbs. Where is the need for 
 discussion, enquiry, further observation ? What 
 necessity to wait ? The result is there—what more do 
 they want ? There is no necessity for big scientific 
 words, for explanations in an incomprehensible lan¬ 
 guage : the miracle is clear, dazzlingly evident! It 
 does not need to be a doctor to see it. Hosanna ! 
 
 Too often it happens that either the family, the 
 benefactors of the patient, or the directors of the pil¬ 
 grimage to which the patient belonged, noisily 
 express their belief and joy; they chant the Mag¬ 
 nificat , acclaim the ”miracul6,” organise ceremonies 
 of thanksgiving on returning to their parish—all 
 
THE FACTS 
 
 6g 
 
 before the supposed cure has been recognised by the 
 competent authorities, or has been subjected to the 
 test of time. 
 
 Frequently also the Press, and above all the 
 Catholic Press, in its desire to serve the good cause 
 and announce the news, acts with a rapidity which is 
 not without danger: it publishes some sensational 
 fact, broadcasting it over the country, without either 
 criticism, discussion, or official confirmation. Thus 
 the reality of some supernatural cure is accepted on 
 totally inadequate grounds, and before it has been 
 passed and admitted as such by the medical body* 
 
 In such conditions it is easy to see that the enemies 
 of religion and the supernatural have an easy triumph, 
 when in the place of the miraculously cured whom 
 they expected, whose advent had been announced by 
 enthusiastic pilgrims or prematurely by the Press, 
 they see some person arrive who is either not cured at 
 all, or only partially so, or who has never been abso¬ 
 lutely normal. From some such prematurely an¬ 
 nounced or absolutely false fact, many jump to 
 the conclusion that the miracles of Lourdes are 
 either imaginative, or the products of superstition or 
 fraud, and forthwith proceed to throw discredit and 
 suspicion upon the medical body at the Bureau. 
 
 It is very clear that a vigorous control must be con¬ 
 stantly exercised with regard to all the cures obtained 
 at Lourdes, so that public opinion may not be 
 deceived. It is not less necessary to proceed always 
 with caution and deliberation. 
 
 At Lourdes it is rare that medical evidence is 
 present at the precise moment that a wound cicatrises, 
 
70 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 a fracture consolidates, or some moribund abruptly 
 returns to health. 
 
 The certification or verification of a cure cannot be 
 suddenly made. Generally the doctors have only 
 before them some patient who avers that now he is 
 well, and has passed from extreme illness to a state 
 of health. 
 
 To support and confirm this statement, the medical 
 experts must conduct careful and scrupulous enquiries, 
 and it is absolutely necessary for them to base their 
 opinion on irrefutable documents, on trustworthy 
 evidence, so that they may be capable of refuting all 
 objections. 
 
 This has been the precise end for which the Medical 
 Bureau was established in 1882. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 The role of the Bureau—Faith and Science—Dr. de St Maclou 
 —Dr. Boissarie—The Bureau at the present day—Dr. Cox 
 —Voluntary collaborators—The work shared by all the 
 doctors—Enquiries—The official reports—Public meetings 
 —Discussions—Continued careful study—Conscience and 
 good faith—The change in medical opinion—The publica¬ 
 tion of cures—Reply to the critics—The Bureau cannot 
 be a hospital clinic. 
 
 “ Those doctors and students who enter the Medical Bureau 
 should first salute the statue of St Luke as they go to take up 
 their work of charity. Having done this, they will only lower 
 the banner of Science before Truth itself: for Science is of 
 men, whilst Truth is from God.”— Dr. Feron-Vrau : Address 
 to the Catholic Medical Faculty of Lille. 
 
 I 
 
 HE role of the Medical Bureau is first and fore- 
 
 X most to establish and demonstrate the extra¬ 
 ordinary and extra-natural character of the cures at 
 Lourdes. The enquiry as to the cause of these cures, 
 and the affirmation of their supernatural character, is 
 the affair of the ecclesiastical authorities. It seems to 
 me that this gives a perfect security to those scientific 
 men who refuse to enter the domain of the miraculous : 
 it gives them a guarantee which should incite them 
 not to hold aloof from the work of examination to 
 which they are cordially invited. 
 
 The number of sick who come to implore their cure 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 7 2 
 
 is a constantly growing one. In the interests of 
 research and truth, it is necessary to furnish means of 
 study, control, and evidence, in order to combat un¬ 
 believing critics and those who are in bad faith. 
 
 Renan maintained that scientific proof of a miracle 
 could not be obtained. “ The supernatural does not 
 exist! Consequently a miracle is impossible.” But 
 the miraculous nevertheless shows itself most clearly 
 on the banks of the Gave, despite the protests of so- 
 called Science. Faith will discuss the matter with 
 Science, which latter demands evidence and proof, 
 although it is often with the hope that definite proof 
 will not be forthcoming. 
 
 To do this Faith has not asked Science to meet her 
 in the Universities, nor at the reunions of learned 
 societies; she has asked her instead to come and dis¬ 
 cuss the matter courteously with her at the foot of the 
 Grotto. There Faith claims to be victorious, and to 
 compel her adversary to submit to the evidence, she 
 demands that both believers and unbelievers shall 
 come to see for themselves, shall study the facts on the 
 spot. She does not reject any criticism, any discus¬ 
 sion, but promises to give Science, if she on her part 
 is loyal, scientific proof of the reality of the super¬ 
 natural and its effects. Faith will herself enlighten 
 her at this well-spring of the supernatural, with a 
 light capable of dissipating the most obstinate pre¬ 
 judices. 
 
 Those who follow Renan by denying the super¬ 
 natural, for the most part are ignorant of the fact that 
 there exists at Lourdes a veritable clinic, open to 
 all and unique in the world for the number and variety 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 7 3 
 
 of pathological cases which can be observed there, 
 where each one has the right and the possibility of 
 making acquaintance with and studying the super¬ 
 natural : this clinic is the Medical Bureau. 
 
 It was in 1885 by the help of Providence that a 
 Catholic doctor, as retiring as he was learned, by 
 founding the Medical Bureau, began that work which 
 has allowed the incredulous to come in contact with 
 the manifestations of the supernatural. 
 
 This strange institution, this extraordinary 
 clinic, had its birth, to begin with, in a modest 
 wooden hut close to the piscines. There it was that 
 up to the year 1891 Dr. de St Maclou conducted the 
 first enquiries into the cures obtained by the inter¬ 
 cession of the Queen of Heaven. Assisted only by 
 some priest or Religious who served as secretary and 
 entered the certificates in a primitive register, Dr. de 
 St Maclou alone was responsible for the examinations 
 and the conclusions arrived at. Little by little other 
 doctors began to arrive, drawn either by curiosity, or 
 later by the desire of explaining naturally these cures, 
 which became more and more numerous. 
 
 In this way they began the study which has upset 
 all their theories. In 1892, when the late Dr. 
 Boissarie succeeded to the post of Dr. de St Maclou, 
 more than 150 doctors had visited the Bureau during 
 the course of that summer; and now for thirty 
 years these cures have been the subject of minute 
 enquiry, of serious and conscientious investigation, 
 and are subjected to the most rigorous control. 
 
 Dr. Boissarie, who was so well known by sight to 
 all who visited Lourdes, and whose name is known 
 
74 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 throughout the world, directed the Bureau for thirty 
 years, with a loyalty and professional skill which were 
 universally recognised. 
 
 This excellent master, who was justly called “the 
 Judge of the Supernatural,” died piously at over 
 eighty years of age on June 28, 1917. 
 
 The Bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes, Monsignor 
 Schoepfer, in collaboration with my colleague, Dr. 
 Le Bee, the President of the Society of St Luke, 
 entrusted me with the task of succeeding him, who 
 had so sympathetically welcomed my help during a 
 number of years, and for whom I shall always pre¬ 
 serve the most affectionate respect. 
 
 I desire here to thank Monsignor the Bishop most 
 sincerely for the confidence he has shown me in ap¬ 
 pointing me to this arduous post. 
 
 To-day the Medical Bureau has a comfortable and 
 spacious installation beneath the north ramp of the 
 Rosary alongside the offices of the Hospitality. The 
 room where the examinations are held is surmounted 
 by a statue of St Luke. 
 
 Here the two doctors who are in charge of the 
 Bureau are installed, assisted by their devoted col¬ 
 league Dr. Cox, who for more than twenty-five years 
 has been the unwearied secretary of our Lady of 
 Lourdes. They would be insufficient for the work, 
 owing to the enormous number of cases and the visits 
 of so many medical men to the international clinic 
 of Lourdes, were they not assisted by numbers of 
 these colleagues, many of them well known for their 
 science, who lend their aid and take an active part in 
 the work. Under the direction of the President and 
 
DR. BOISSARIE 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 7 5 
 
 Vice-President, these visiting doctors proceed them¬ 
 selves to make the official enquiries. 
 
 XI 
 
 So many patients present themselves, either to 
 testify to their cure or to bring proof that it has stood 
 the test of time, that the Medical Bureau constitutes, 
 as it were, a veritable court of the miraculous, where 
 all ages, classes, and varieties of disease are repre¬ 
 sented. During the summer months of each year 
 our Bureau offers medical men a most interesting field 
 of study. With us it is impossible to specialise; one 
 can never see in advance the work that it will be 
 necessary to undertake. The most interesting cases 
 present themselves when they are least expected. The 
 personnel examining the cases changes very fre¬ 
 quently, and so we have successively fresh doctors 
 analysing facts, discussing objections, verifying evi¬ 
 dence and deducing conclusions. 
 
 In the majority of the cases the cures are studied 
 by doctors having no official connection with the 
 Bureau; they embrace experienced general practi¬ 
 tioners, well-known professors, specialists, etc., whose 
 names are invariably inscribed in our registers, and 
 whose good faith cannot for one moment be called in 
 question. 
 
 Not infrequently the examinations are made by the 
 doctors who have had the patient under their care 
 during the malady in question. In this case we 
 demand full particulars from them, and in return give 
 our unbiased opinion, so that in a measure they are 
 constrained to control the reports that are published 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 ;6 
 
 concerning their patients. By this method of pro¬ 
 cedure the Bureau is freed from being under the influ¬ 
 ence of any school or dominating personality, and its 
 declarations thus have a very definite scientific value. 
 
 In our enquiries we continually do our best to obtain 
 precision and accuracy. We look into all the evi¬ 
 dence, examine all who are competent to express an 
 opinion, neglect no clue, and especially value the 
 explanation and remarks given by the practitioner 
 who has had charge of the case. 
 
 Thus the history of each patient and each cure is 
 not only recorded in our Bureau, but also by the visit¬ 
 ing medical men, who establish it by the most precise 
 details. 
 
 At Lourdes during the pilgrimages there are not 
 only the doctors officially attached to the pilgrimages, 
 but others also are called to give their opinion on the 
 cures. They may perhaps be chance visitors, or have 
 come expressly to carry out researches. Definite con¬ 
 clusions are never arrived at in the Bureau without 
 asking the opinion of all the doctors who are present. 
 
 As we said before, we have sometimes the doctor 
 who has had the case under treatment, who has fol¬ 
 lowed its whole evolution, and has ineffectually done 
 his best to stay the progress of the disease. After 
 the cure the patient’s doctor is asked to formulate his 
 opinion and give a definite conclusion. 
 
 The Medical Bureau commences by making a care¬ 
 ful winnowing of all the facts presented for its 
 examination. It verifies and classes the evidence, 
 questions and examines the patients. If the slightest 
 doubt exists, appeal is made to well-known specialists 
 
I 
 
 a 
 
 THE BUREAU DES CONSTATATIONS MEDICALES. 
 
-t/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 77 
 
 or professors. Later on the doctors not attached to 
 the Bureau, those who have treated the patient at 
 home, occupy themselves with the case. 
 
 It is surely permissible to declare that our enquiries 
 are conducted with the strictest impartiality, and 
 with the same conscientious exactitude that is required 
 
 for the various observations which are the bases of our 
 
 \ 
 
 clinical and biological studies. The basis is not an 
 idea, an abstraction; it rests on the solid ground of 
 real facts definitely and scientifically demonstrated. 
 The conclusions arrived at in the clinic of Lourdes 
 are destined to bring out the ‘ ‘ supernatural ’ * factor 
 in these cures. One case only of this sort, if it is 
 scientifically demonstrated to be obtained outside the 
 limits of natural law, is sufficient to prove the pos¬ 
 sibility of the miraculous. Consequently the Medical 
 Bureau fills a role which is of capital importance, 
 since it demonstrates the presence of ‘ ‘ supernatural ’ ’ 
 facts, and as a result annihilates the rationalistic thesis. 
 
 It is sufficient to have once assisted at one of the 
 stances at the Bureau at Lourdes to be convinced that 
 the sole thing sought there is the truth : everything is 
 done openly and conscientiously. The miraculous is 
 not sought for; the idea is not to multiply super¬ 
 natural facts—in fact, every effort is made to remove 
 everything which is at all suspicious; to be accepted 
 the supernatural must be clearly and certainly evi¬ 
 dent. With anything doubtful judgement is always 
 suspended for as long a time as is necessary. Suspect 
 or doubtful cases are formally rejected; cases not pre¬ 
 senting evidence of the supernatural are dismissed 
 without discussion. 
 
78 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 At the Bureau the first depositions of the witnesses 
 are recorded, the certificates brought by the sick are 
 verified; then the patients themselves are examined, 
 and from all this a definite report is drawn up, which, 
 together with the patient, the practitioners present 
 examine and discuss. 
 
 All medical men without respect of nationality or 
 religious belief have only to knock at the door of the 
 Bureau, and give evidence that they are medical men, 
 to be at once invited to enter and examine the cases. 
 The question of the miraculous is not mentioned, no 
 one is asked to believe in the supernatural. They are 
 simply invited to give their advice as clinicians; they 
 are told: “Here is a definite fact. Do you recog¬ 
 nise its existence ? If not, speak no more about the 
 subject. If you do, state whether or no traces of the 
 old malady exist. If not, can you explain naturally 
 this sudden and complete cure?” If the experts are 
 unanimous, well and good. If only in a considerable 
 majority, then time must confirm the cure before it is 
 declared to be supernatural. What better guarantees 
 can be required ? 
 
 I have before mentioned that all the doctors are 
 asked to give their help in examining the patients. 
 If we ourselves examine the cases, I am of opinion 
 that we should not take a preponderating part; our 
 aim should be, above all, to preside over the debates, 
 to register the opinions of those we have designated 
 to examine the cases, and after they have come to a 
 conclusion, then to announce the definite decision of 
 the Bureau. 
 
 If the cases were studied, controlled, and published 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 79 
 
 solely by doctors permanently attached to Lourdes— 
 living and having their being, so to speak, in an atmo¬ 
 sphere of the supernatural—then their conclusions 
 might perhaps reasonably be called in question. But 
 what particularly characterises the Bureau is that the 
 various judgements are given after conscientious 
 examinations by medical men coming from all parts; 
 each year we can cite the presence of various pro¬ 
 fessors, members of hospital staffs, specialists, and 
 old hospital residents (internes). 
 
 During 1920 a Swiss medical man, on leaving here, 
 remarked to me that the time he had spent at the 
 Medical Bureau had been a revelation to him. “ In 
 Switzerland,” said this good colleague, “scientific 
 circles are generally convinced that what takes place 
 at Lourdes is either commonplace or not worth atten¬ 
 tion. They believe that the examination of the 
 patients and the making out of the reports are 
 entrusted to one or two doctors, whose good faith they 
 do not impugn, but they assert that they are so under 
 the influence of their surroundings that they are 
 inclined to see the miraculous everywhere. You have 
 enabled me to convince myself that this opinion is 
 absolutely false, since for the most part during the 
 time that I have been at the Bureau, the cases have 
 been studied by doctors who have been visiting 
 Lourdes. All you demand is loyalty, and you have 
 been so impartially careful and scrupulous as to 
 make our reports the official conclusions of the 
 Bureau. I leave with the conviction that at Lourdes 
 all the examinations are conducted most carefully 
 and conscientiously, and shall most certainly 
 
80 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 make my opinion known when I return to Switzer¬ 
 land.* * 
 
 The same language practically was used to me in 
 the case of a Protestant lady doctor. In my opinion 
 such statements as these should convince the most 
 sceptical; they constitute a most practical testimonial 
 as to the value of our clinic, which is still too little 
 known to the scientific world. 
 
 The doctors we ask at Lourdes to assist us are not 
 colleagues who are known to us; they are not prac¬ 
 titioners already convinced. They are of diverse 
 creeds. We simply ask them to examine because they 
 happen to be present. Amongst them there are some 
 whose names carry authority, whose evidence cannot 
 be possibly called in question. When they recognise 
 that the results we obtain at Lourdes go counter to all 
 experience, and do not coincide with results ordinarily 
 met with, it is impossible to believe that they have also 
 been influenced in every case by suggestion, that they 
 are in error when they state they have witnessed in¬ 
 stantaneous cures of such and such an organic disease. 
 
 When a cure occurs, the examination of that case is 
 entrusted to a certain number of medical men, either 
 chosen haphazard, or according to their speciality 
 amongst those present, and they may belong to any 
 school of thought, creed, or nationality. They 
 examine with care the antecedents, the history of the 
 case, its cure. They search out all the evidence 
 capable of leading to certitude, and essay to base 
 their judgement on certain proofs. 
 
 Having each made up their mind according to the 
 examination of the patient, witnesses, documents, 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 81 
 
 certificates, etc., a report is drawn up; this is then 
 read before the rest of the doctors present. 
 
 The case is then generally discussed, each being 
 free to give his opinion as to the conclusion to be 
 adopted. In 1920 I drew up a definite formula com¬ 
 prising the following questions, to which all were 
 asked to reply by either Yes or No : 
 
 I. Did the disease really exist ? 
 
 II. Has there been an absolute cure ? Or only an 
 evident amelioration-? 
 
 III. Is there any reason to postpone*the con¬ 
 clusion ? 
 
 IV. Can the cure be attributed to natural means ? 
 
 Thus each case of cure is submitted to a study 
 where discussion and cross-examination can be 
 exercised. 
 
 Ill 
 
 It is perfectly evident, then, that there is no secrecy 
 or concealment with regard to the cures at the 
 Medical Bureau. On the contrary, there is a con¬ 
 siderable measure of publicity. However, whilst in 
 the interests of truth the greatest publicity possible 
 should be aimed at, yet it is indispensable, in the 
 examination of the cases, to use much discretion, and 
 even at times secrecy, as must be done in the course 
 of ordinary medical examinations. For this reason, 
 in 1920 I put in force an old regulation which had 
 become obsolete, and this was that the room in which 
 the medical examinations were carried out should be 
 absolutely strictly reserved for doctors only, and 
 
 6 
 
82 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 those witnesses or other persons concerned whom it 
 was necessary to interrogate. 
 
 Little by little the custom had come in at Lourdes 
 of penetrating into all the rooms of the Medical 
 Bureau, even at the times of investigation and 
 examination of the patients. It frequently happened 
 in consequence that freshly arrived medical men were 
 unable to gain entrance. Again, this invasion of the 
 Bureau had a very awkward aspect, in view of the 
 necessarily private character of some of the consulta¬ 
 tions. 
 
 An incident which occurred in 1913 very definitely 
 comes to mind. I was leaning over a table making 
 out the report, which my colleague Dr. Boissarie had 
 asked me to do, when I suddenly received on my 
 shoulders a lady of no small weight, who, unable to 
 enter by the door, had with the aid of her husband 
 got in through the window. I may add that she was 
 almost immediately followed by a young seminarist, 
 eager to view a “miracule” at close quarters. 
 
 At the Lourdes clinic the examinations are not 
 made superficially or hastily. The investigations at 
 the Bureau, for the most part, take a considerable 
 time, are laborious and difficult, for serious errors 
 must be avoided above all things. It mostly happens 
 that no doctor is on the spot just at the time of a 
 cure. Very often the examiners of the case have not 
 seen it before the cure. It is then necessary, by 
 documents, examinations of absolutely reliable wit¬ 
 nesses, and researches of all sorts, to be able to affirm 
 with certitude the previous existence of the disease. 
 It can be well understood that much labour and time 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 83 
 
 are needed to make the necessary investigations, to 
 classify and verify documents and certificates, to call 
 in the collaboration of witnesses whose evidence shall 
 be above suspicion. 
 
 The official report first being made, then follows 
 the patient’s account, and after that the certificates; 
 these are often incomplete, and cannot furnish the 
 necessary guarantees without further study and 
 enquiry. This necessitates demanding further par¬ 
 ticulars from the doctors who have had charge of the 
 patient before the pilgrimage, and perhaps also from 
 those who have received them cured on their return 
 home. 
 
 Some cases are requested to attend at the Bureau 
 in the morning and afternoon for several days. Each 
 time they are put into the hands of different 
 examiners, who draw out fresh reports. If there is 
 still doubt or a chance of error, the enquiries are 
 pursued at home by means of doctors either in Paris 
 or the provinces; by these means we get correspon¬ 
 dents everywhere, and build up a regular network of 
 information. In this manner elaborate and very com¬ 
 plete reports are drawn up : certificates of arrival, 
 report of the examination, interrogation of patient 
 and witnesses, correspondence, etc. . . . Then the 
 observations and notes of the doctor treating the case, 
 letters, and all sorts of particulars of the case obtained 
 later, have to be classified. The whole report con¬ 
 stitutes quite a large work, which is based finally on 
 undeniable evidence. 
 
 If a case does not appear to be clearly outside the 
 normal, the examination is stopped, and it is dis- 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 84 
 
 cussed no further. Occasionally this causes violent 
 attacks on the part of those who believed or pre¬ 
 tended themselves cured, and are very unwilling to 
 be excluded from the list of privileged persons. 
 
 As a matter of fact, the cure of all maladies which 
 have a definite psychological or nervous origin are 
 put on one side. We very rarely retain such cases, 
 considering them only as simple ameliorations, even 
 though they may have been very extraordinary. 
 
 Those cases only are permanently registered which 
 are complete, have stood the test of time, and have 
 been seriously and conscientiously studied in all their 
 details. 
 
 IV 
 
 After patients have been seen by several medical 
 men, and their “dossier” contains the opinions of 
 three, five, or perhaps ten conscientious practitioners 
 or specialists; when again these cures are controlled 
 by other doctors, of differing schools of thought, 
 nationality, and religion; when the conclusion is pro¬ 
 nounced only after all objections have been heard, 
 and all have been able to express an opinion—then I 
 hold that this method of examination constitutes an 
 enquiry which it would be difficult to make more com¬ 
 plete and thorough. 
 
 As a result of the work of the Bureau and the 
 publication of its findings, the representatives of 
 Science have been compelled to put their silence and 
 disdain on one side. They have been obliged to 
 follow the irresistible current which has now for some 
 years drawn the medical world to acknowledge the 
 teachings of Lourdes. 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 85 
 
 The great religious movement, of which the little 
 Pyrenean city is the centre, has been accompanied by 
 an interest which is constantly growing amongst the 
 medical men of the whole world. Each year we 
 register an increasing number of colleagues who pre¬ 
 sent themselves at the Bureau, which Professor Duret 
 called “the greatest, the most interesting, the most 
 extraordinary clinic in the world.” 1 
 
 In 1905 three hundred and forty-six doctors loyally 
 signed a public declaration to the effect that “ great 
 numbers of cases considered hopeless have been cured 
 at Lourdes by some action of which Science is 
 ignorant, and which cannot be rationally explained 
 by the laws of Nature.” 
 
 We are, then, authorised to say without fear of 
 contradiction that the cures which occur at our sanc¬ 
 tuaries are well worth study, and that they can be 
 submitted to scientific criticism. 
 
 Science rarely disputes the facts, she discusses only 
 their interpretation. This interpretation cannot but 
 be beneficial when it allows itself to be guided, not 
 by prejudice and preconceived opinion, but by care¬ 
 ful examination and honest discussion in conjunction 
 with other colleagues of well-known probity and com¬ 
 petence. These conditions, we do not hesitate to 
 say, are found at Lourdes, and of the work there 
 Bernheim himself said: “The facts exist. All the 
 observations have been made by conscientious men.” 
 
 Our archives contain the reports of all those cases 
 of supernatural cure which have been published, 
 together with all the different phases of the enquiry, 
 
 1 Boissarie, L'CEuvre de Lourdes , p. 35. 
 
86 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 and all the various medical certificates which have 
 served as a base for this search into the supernatural. 
 The publication of these archives has now reached all 
 parts of the world, and for the last sixty years many 
 indifferent and sceptical scientific men have been con¬ 
 vinced by the evidence and rendered homage to the 
 truth. A large number of doctors at the present day, 
 of diverse creeds, also interest themselves in this 
 problem of the supernatural, and those who come to 
 study the subject on the spot carry to all parts 
 of the world the assurance of our good faith and 
 sincerity. 
 
 Boissarie recounts that Dr. Bertillon loyally recog¬ 
 nised that ‘ ‘ all is done in absolute good faith; 
 there is no staging of effects at the Bureau, no 
 manipulation of the facts.” 1 
 
 Moreover, experience has for a long time demon¬ 
 strated that the Bureau at Lourdes shows always a 
 great reserve. This is because it wishes to arrive at 
 a demonstration of the facts which shall be free from 
 all suspicion and adverse criticism, and it is precisely 
 because of this that the cures published by the Bureau 
 are accepted as definite scientific proofs, and are not 
 treated as negligible and of no account. 
 
 The findings of the Bureau are discussed, and it is 
 endeavoured to show that the facts put forward must 
 accord with the laws of Science. The attempt to 
 explain the cures by hysteria, suggestion, or un¬ 
 known laws cannot succeed. 
 
 Those who have watched the manner in which 
 affairs are carried out at the Bureau, have seen the 
 
 1 Boissarie, Annales de N. D. de Lourdes , tome 37, p. 221. 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 87 
 
 scrupulous care and the length of time taken over our 
 decisions, who know also all the reservations we 
 make before definitely concluding as to the nature of 
 the malady and the circumstances of the cure, cannot 
 reasonably continue to support the theory of nervous 
 illnesses, of suggestion, etc.—theories so often put 
 forward, and as frequently refuted; theories which 
 once were very prevalent, and still hold sway amongst 
 the ignorant and the prejudiced. 
 
 Those who have come to Lourdes and taken part in 
 our work know that we preserve for registration 
 and publication only a limited number amongst the 
 more remarkable cures observed. The various cases 
 recorded in our registers by no means represent the 
 totality of the inexplicable cases which occur at the 
 rocks of Massabielle. 
 
 Not infrequently, after the return of the pilgrims to 
 their dioceses, the director of the pilgrimage pub¬ 
 lishes a list of numerous ameliorations, and some¬ 
 times of definite cures. 
 
 Boissarie reports 1 that in 1908, although no case 
 belonging to the Lyons Pilgrimage had been cured 
 according to the Bureau, yet the official bulletin gave 
 a list of no less than -fifty-two. It may certainly be 
 affirmed that a certain number of these fifty-two cases 
 were worthy of being retained in our reports, and 
 it does sometimes happen that they are rectified 
 by communications from the diocesan directors. 
 But it is none the less certain that the majority of 
 these cases cited after the return could offer no such 
 degree of scientific proof as to warrant their obtaining 
 
 1 Les Guerisons , p. 12. 
 
88 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 a place in our archives. However that may be, it is 
 certain that there are quite a number of cases cured 
 at the Grotto which absolutely escape us. 
 
 Amongst this number are found many isolated 
 cases, patients who have not come with the pil¬ 
 grimages but privately, have not stayed in hospital 
 but rested at some of the hotels, and have not wished 
 to come to the Bureau, from fear of attracting 
 curiosity and of drawing upon themselves the atten¬ 
 tion of the crowds. 
 
 Again, there are cases which have come to Lourdes 
 and during their stay there have not experienced the 
 slightest change for the better, but are perhaps cured 
 in the train during the return journey or a few days 
 after in their own homes, and such cases as these do 
 not come to our knowledge. 
 
 It happens, therefore, that each year a number of 
 cures are reported which have not been officially regis¬ 
 tered at the Bureau. But even allowing for a certain 
 amount of exaggeration in the local statistics, it can¬ 
 not be denied that the number of cases published in 
 our annals is far below the actual number of cures 
 obtained, simply because the field of observation is 
 too vast for us to take in and chronicle the complete 
 totality of events. 
 
 Whatever may be the number of sick cured by our 
 Lady of Lourdes, it is certain that the cures are 
 definite facts. They cannot be denied; it is absurd 
 to contradict what the most sceptical can come and 
 observe for themselves, cases established and con¬ 
 firmed by such reliable evidence. Doctors who have 
 come to the Bureau, and studied for themselves our 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 89 
 
 methods, know that the cures of Lourdes are verities 
 which cannot be denied. 
 
 V 
 
 Perfection is not of this world. I willingly recog¬ 
 nise that even with the advantages of modern science, 
 which we at present use or propose to use in 
 the future at our clinic, we shall never altogether 
 escape criticism; there will always remain some joints 
 in our armour. Still, it does not follow that all the 
 reproaches addressed to the Bureau are by any means 
 merited. 
 
 Certain unbelievers who do not trust the Bureau 
 and the method in which we conduct our examina¬ 
 tions, state that to be convinced they would require 
 that on a certain definite date a miracle should be 
 granted, which should be examined by a number of 
 men of science who were all convinced sceptics. This 
 seems to me a somewhat singular proposition. They 
 wish, as a matter of fact, to cite Providence before a 
 definite tribunal, and then examine its acts. When 
 a patient is cured at Lourdes outside natural laws by 
 the goodness of the Creator, the Medical Bureau 
 studies the circumstances in which the divine influence 
 manifested itself, and examines the facts to the best 
 of its ability. 
 
 It has, however, never yet had the idea of citing the 
 Omnipotent of Heaven before its tribunal at a definite 
 date. The Bureau awaits the time and means which 
 the Sovereign Master may use to manifest his inter¬ 
 vention. We can never choose the moment for a cure 
 any more than the patients whose prayers will be 
 
90 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 heard. During certain weeks it may happen that we 
 have not a single case to register; and then again, on 
 some day quite a number present themselves at the 
 Bureau, waiting to have their return to health 
 medically certified. 
 
 We are frequently reproached at the Medical 
 Bureau for publishing too quickly, for “making 
 known cures which need more examination and 
 research before being definitely confirmed.” Our 
 worthy predecessor long ago replied to this accusa¬ 
 tion : “These premature publications, at times ren¬ 
 dered necessary by the impatient curiosity of the pil¬ 
 grims, who would look elsewhere for less reliable 
 accounts, have besides their inconveniences certain 
 advantages. They induce free discussion about all 
 the facts, discussions in which the most diverse 
 opinions are brought forward, at a time when the 
 facts are still fresh in the mind and everybody knows 
 about them. A work which demands the light of day 
 and rests upon definite evidence cannot be completed 
 in the silence of the study.” I acknowledge that 
 sometimes some cases published too hastily by the 
 journals must be rejected; the same occasionally 
 happens with regard to reports in our registers, which 
 after further enquiry have to be cancelled. When 
 this occurs, however, the facts are invariably con¬ 
 scientiously noticed in our archives, and brought to 
 the notice of the public by means of our official organ, 
 the Journal of the Grotto. 
 
 Others have accused the Bureau of not being suffi¬ 
 ciently scrupulous and scientific in its examinations. 
 Thus Dr. Le Fur of Paris, in a communication that 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 9i 
 
 he read before the Society of St Luke in 1901, summed 
 up * f the desiderata demanded by those who were of 
 a definitely scientific spirit.” 
 
 These desiderata, according to our eminent col¬ 
 league, were as follows: 
 
 (1) “A severe winnowing should be made, and 
 only those cases absolutely inexplicable retained, such 
 as any person in good faith must acknowledge.” 
 
 But I have already stated that this is the chief pre¬ 
 occupation of the Bureau. I brought forward as 
 proof of this the struggle we are obliged to wage 
 against the enthusiasm of the crowd and the haste of 
 the Press. I also instanced the rectifications which 
 we publish each year with regard to accounts of cures 
 prematurely given to the public. 
 
 A notice is prominently displayed in the hall of 
 the Bureau calling the attention of our colleagues to 
 the absolute necessity of successive and long examina¬ 
 tions, as these alone can give sufficient guarantee to 
 reports published at the earliest opportunity. 
 
 In September, 1920, in a communication inserted 
 in the Journal of the Grotto , I called attention to the 
 grave consequences which can ensue from the pub¬ 
 lication by unauthorised journals of fantastic reports 
 and pretended cures which are sent to them, and I 
 insisted on the support that such recitals furnished 
 to the enemies of the supernatural. 
 
 (2) “ Each patient arriving at Lourdes must be 
 furnished with a satisfactory medical certificate.” 
 
 Alas ! It does not suffice either to write or say 
 “the organisers of pilgrimages must demand from 
 the doctors very detailed certificates.” The patients 
 
92 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 brought to Lourdes by the Association of “ Notre 
 Dame du Salut,” or those brought by the more im¬ 
 portant pilgrimages, usually possess a definite report, 
 and the certificate from a doctor who has attended 
 them and seen them shortly before their departure 
 for Lourdes. We have ourselves drawn up a definite 
 formula which we should like to see uniformly 
 adopted by all. But, as I shall relate in the next 
 chapter, it is very often difficult to obtain detailed 
 and exact descriptions of the illness. Even if the 
 forms made and approved are adopted for the 
 medical observations, how many medical men there 
 are who have either not the time or the inclination to 
 do this, and who will continue to give certificates 
 written in haste and carelessly worded. 
 
 Again, how obtain definite certificates in the case 
 of isolated pilgrims who belong to no definitely 
 organised party ? 
 
 In such cases when, as so often happens, there is 
 this unfortunate gap which it is difficult to fill up, the 
 fault must not be attributed to the Medical Bureau. 
 Careful and accurate certificates are good. An 
 enquiry conducted with abundant witnesses and all 
 scientific precautions is better still. 
 
 (3) “ In certain cases, a photograph or radiograph 
 should be attached to the notes. In the case of con¬ 
 sumption the examination for the bacilli is indis¬ 
 pensable.’ J 
 
 It is seldom now that patients suffering from 
 osseous, articular, visceral, or pulmonary lesions do 
 not bring a radiograph with them to the Bureau. 
 Again, the result of the examination for tubercle 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 93 
 
 bacilli is usually stated in the case of the tuberculous. 
 I have installed at the Bureau a microscope and a 
 small room for eye examinations, and a colleague at 
 Lourdes has placed at our disposal his laboratory for 
 radiology. But it is indispensable to bear in mind 
 that those who come to demand their cure of our 
 Lady of Lourdes cannot be compared to those 
 patients who visit some definite health resort: in the 
 one case the main preoccupation is the scrupulous 
 observance of all the details of the treatment, and an 
 absolute submission to all the advice; whilst in the 
 other the medical point of view is reduced to the 
 minimum in the eyes of those who place their confi¬ 
 dence in the powerful intervention of our blessed 
 Lady. 
 
 Those who demand so urgently, and with so much 
 noise, that the Bureau at Lourdes should take the first 
 place in this city of the miraculous, totally ignore the 
 mentality of the pilgrims. Before the Bureau, and 
 leaving it absolutely in the shade, is the Grotto, the 
 various religious exercises, the Procession of the 
 Blessed Sacrament, the Basilica, and the blessed 
 Virgin herself. 
 
 It must be carefully borne in mind that for the sick 
 at Lourdes the religious aspect is all, the medical side 
 practically negligible. When this is recognised it 
 will be seen how absolutely chimerical are various 
 suggestions that have been put forward to render 
 the prodigies that happen at Lourdes more complete 
 and certain. 
 
 For instance: 
 
 “ The individual witness of medical men is insufft- 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 94 
 
 cient. Let there be appointed a definite commission 
 charged with the control of the certificates and the 
 drawing up of the reports.” 
 
 “ A radiograph must be made in all those cases in 
 which it is essential for diagnosis, or for the result of 
 treatment. A photograph should be taken before 
 and after the cure in every case.” 
 
 “ There must be a microscopic examination of all 
 tumours. It is indispensable that the same doctor 
 examines the patient on arrival, and again after the 
 cure.” 
 
 “ In each piscine there should be a doctor, so that 
 he may be present at the cure, and notice the various 
 phases of the return to health.” 
 
 Anyone who makes such demands as these can have 
 very little idea of the actual condition of things at 
 Lourdes. 
 
 If all these researches can be used in some clinic, 
 where patients come voluntarily to trust themselves in 
 the hands of specialists; or if at hospital one can be 
 somewhat exigent towards patients who in return for 
 treatment contribute towards clinical research and the 
 training of the students, the case is quite different at 
 Lourdes. 
 
 I have mentioned how short the stay usually is of 
 these unfortunates who have been abandoned by 
 Science, and come here hoping only in the interces¬ 
 sion of our blessed Lady. Practically the whole of 
 their time is consecrated to acts of faith, piety, and 
 prayer: the sick remain only for the hours of meals 
 and during the night in the halls of the hospital, 
 establishments which have only the name of hospitals. 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 95 
 
 Early each morning they are conducted or escorted 
 to the Grotto, where they assist at Mass. After this 
 the ladies attached to the service of the sick serve 
 them a meal under the shade of the trees, which are 
 close to the Sanctuary. Then comes the waiting at 
 the piscine, the bath, and more prayers at the Grotto. 
 In the afternoon there are numerous other exercises 
 before the Grotto, at the piscines, and finally the big 
 Procession of the Blessed Sacrament. How could 
 one possibly insist on the pilgrims depriving them¬ 
 selves of some of these religious exercises to devote 
 the time to being examined by some medical com¬ 
 mission, to give themselves up to laboratory experi¬ 
 ments or some special examination, which would 
 appear of little utility to them ? 
 
 Here is a poor patient with advanced cancer; the 
 trouble is generalised. As soon as he descends from 
 the train, would you break into the enthusiasm which 
 has brought him to the feet of our Lady, and stay 
 him at the door of the Bureau ? Can you imagine 
 imposing upon him the obligation of letting you have 
 a specimen of his tumour for your microscope ? The 
 name you give to his disease matters little to him. 
 
 By what right can you impose upon patients that 
 they shall come before a tribunal of unknown doctors 
 and exhibit their diseases ? 
 
 During the great pilgrimages at Lourdes, it is not 
 rare to have as many as a thousand or twelve hun¬ 
 dred sick. Where will you find sufficient doctors to 
 examine singly these large, numbers ? 
 
 The doctors themselves, as a rule, only make a 
 short sojourn in the Pyrenees. It would be materially 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 96 
 
 impossible for them to find the time to examine more 
 than a very small proportion of these subjects. “ One 
 could make a choice/’ objects someone—“the most 
 interesting cases could be studied.” Yes, perhaps, 
 if one knew in advance those cases which would be 
 privileged. For most certainly those to whom a 
 cure was promised would willingly submit themselves 
 to an examination. 
 
 When a cure is produced, there is no longer any 
 delay or hesitation. The happy privileged person 
 is only too glad to come and receive at the Bureau 
 the official confirmation of the favour which has been 
 accorded to him, and to contribute his part to the 
 glory of our Lady. But as God gives us no indica¬ 
 tions of those whom he will choose, and necessity 
 obliges us to limit the number of our observations, it 
 happens that the needed examination is often want¬ 
 ing in the case of those who are cured. 
 
 Again I repeat that it is comparatively seldom that 
 the patients come voluntarily to the Bureau before 
 being cured. “7 have not the time. ... If I am 
 cured you will certainly see me.” That is the response 
 that is frequently made me, when I ask some inter¬ 
 esting case to come to the Bureau before going to the 
 piscine. 
 
 A large number of the pilgrims, too, are absolutely 
 convinced that it is useless and superfluous to present 
 themselves at the Bureau. The crowd, which can 
 little understand our difficulties and delays, is only 
 too disposed to approve and applaud such a declara¬ 
 tion as, “ This poor patient came to Lourdes to 
 demand a cure of the holy Virgin. What business is 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 9 7 
 
 it of the doctors?” Others advise their friends not 
 to go near the Bureau. “ The Medical Bureau is a 
 cold douche establishment , so hostile to the declara¬ 
 tion of a miracle, that one may demand whether the 
 doctors at the Bureau believe at all in the super¬ 
 natural.” 
 
 I must admit that I feel somewhat satisfied when 
 remarks like this are reported to me; they are at any 
 rate witness to the reserve we use, and are definite 
 evidence of the caution manifested before admitting 
 the extraordinary nature of some cure. They 
 demonstrate, at the same time, however, that it is far 
 from easy for us to get the cases we desire for 
 examination. 
 
 Let us grant for a moment that it is possible dur¬ 
 ing five months of the year to have a photographic 
 operator at work: do people really imagine that all 
 the cases we wish to be photographed will submit to 
 that ordeal ? Will some hunchback, some patient 
 disfigured by lupus, allow this when there is no cer¬ 
 titude of cure ? 
 
 Again, Lourdes is not a hospital. The only 
 patients we can interrogate are those who have no 
 objection to our doing so. 
 
 Continuing in the same order of ideas, it is abso¬ 
 lutely impossible to think of some doctor assisting 
 at the piscine, at an immersion where the greater 
 number wish to be incognito. There is not a woman 
 who would undress in front of a doctor of whom she 
 has not the slightest knowledge, and for whose advice 
 she has not asked. When I sign the permission 
 for some colleague who asks to see how things are 
 
 7 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 98 
 
 conducted at the piscines, the idea never entered my 
 head that the card I sign shall give him the right of 
 entry to the piscines reserved for the women. 
 
 What a terrible task it would be for the doctors 
 who undertook this duty when on some days in each 
 bath some hundreds are immersed ! 
 
 But let us be serious. How is the bathing under¬ 
 taken at Lourdes ? The patient when undressed is 
 wrapped by the member of the hospitality who is on 
 duty at the piscine in a bath-gown. If the patient 
 can walk she descends the cement steps of the bath, 
 assisted on each side by one of the ladies working 
 there, otherwise she is lowered by means of straps. 
 She advances to the end of the bath, where she kisses 
 the statue of the blessed Virgin. Then she plunges, 
 or is plunged, in the icy water. After this she comes 
 out, immediately giving place to someone else. Dur¬ 
 ing these different and rapid actions the prayers are 
 uninterrupted. The patient during the whole time 
 of the bath recites the act of contrition, whilst the 
 lady infirmarians say the invocations. 
 
 Well, can you imagine the doctor on duty sud¬ 
 denly stopping these acts of piety and saying to the 
 patient: “ Please wait a moment. The prayers and 
 invocations must cease. The moment has come for 
 me to note the temperature. I must take the pulse 
 and respiration rate, and also a record of the blood- 
 pressure . . ? 
 
 Consequently, what we have to do is to utilise as 
 far as possible the means placed at our disposal. Let 
 us not step outside the position assigned us. The 
 role of the Medical Bureau is to control and put in 
 
THE MEDICAL BUREAU 
 
 99 
 
 evidence, as far as it possibly can under the circum- 
 stanceSy the extra-natural processes of many of the 
 cures. 
 
 The Bureau is not meant to diagnose disease, to 
 teach, and to treat as is done at an ordinary 
 hospital. 
 
 

 CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE DOCTORS 
 
 The role of the doctors since the apparitions—A medical move¬ 
 ment in favour of Lourdes—Those who keep away— 
 Human respect— Madame Rouchel —The doctors of Metz 
 — The Academicians — The Faculties — Sectarianism — 
 Medical certificates—The doctors who believe—Those 
 who do not—The incredulous—The irreconcilables—The 
 sceptics—Those who will not investigate—Good faith— 
 Mademoiselle Claire Paquignon —The victory of evidence 
 —The medical pilgrims. 
 
 I 
 
 HE medical profession has been called to pro- 
 
 X nounce on the marvellous facts of Lourdes, which 
 occur so publicly, from the time of the appearance 
 of the miraculous spring in the corner of the Grotto, 
 indicated by our Lady to Bernadette, up to and 
 including our own time. 
 
 At the commencement there was the question of 
 Bernadette’s mental state, of investigating and 
 understanding her statements, of explaining the first 
 cures that took place at the spring. Now at the 
 present time there is still necessity to observe the ways 
 by which the supernatural manifests itself, and here 
 the medical profession has an important task. 
 
 Now, as in former days, the doctors are asked to 
 give their opinion about facts which contradict all 
 known laws, all the notions and deductions acquired 
 as the result of rigorous observation. 
 
 ioo 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 IOI 
 
 Before Lourdes, before 1858, the doctors had to lay 
 down their arms when all the resources of medical 
 skill had been exhausted, and declare themselves 
 powerless in the face of approaching death. 
 
 Since the apparitions on the banks of the Gave, 
 people have come from all parts of the world suffering 
 from maladies which human Science had pronounced 
 incurable, and after prayer at the Grotto, or at the 
 passage of our Lord in the blessed Sacrament, have 
 suddenly recovered their health despite the adverse 
 opinions of Science. 
 
 It is easy to understand that the first movement 
 of the medical world, in view of these prodigies, was 
 one of surprise, even of revolt against facts which 
 so unexpectedly reversed notions acquired during 
 their professional education. 
 
 It is not altogether easy for a man of science to 
 recognise that a power exists capable of doing that 
 which medicine and surgery cannot do. Conse¬ 
 quently, it is easy to understand how Lourdes had 
 declared and irreconcilable enemies amongst the 
 medical profession. It is natural for men exclusively 
 habituated to the observation of facts not to accept 
 without careful control other facts which totally 
 reverse scientific opinion, and to be at first dumb¬ 
 founded before such a problem. 
 
 To all we use the same language: “We publish 
 observations of extraordinary cures. If you believe 
 that our interpretation of these cures is an erroneous 
 one, then respond to our demand: Come to the 
 Medical Bureau at Lourdes. If there we can show 
 you some blind person who has suddenly recovered 
 
102 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 sight, some ulcer which has cicatrised suddenly, or 
 some other well-known organic malady which has 
 disappeared in a few instants, and you can state your¬ 
 self the reality of the fact, in conformity with the most 
 rigorous laws of evidence and by careful clinical 
 examination, then we ask you simply to acknowledge 
 the reality of the facts; after that you can search for 
 some explanation which shall satisfy you.” 
 
 The only true means to solve this problem is to 
 study the facts. The question cannot be solved by a 
 sarcastic smile, a shrug of the shoulders, or some 
 frivolous witticism. At one time it was the fashion 
 with Diday, Charcot, and a number of others to mock 
 and laugh as often as Lourdes was mentioned. It 
 was sought to escape an embarrassing question by 
 silence or contempt; or if this was not the case, the 
 difficulty was solved at a distance without examina¬ 
 tion, by means of some hypothesis which had no basis 
 in fact. Another method was to try and swamp the 
 evidence, as it were, by a flood of abuse. It is im¬ 
 possible to forget the terrible blasphemies uttered 
 against our Lady of Lourdes by the German scientific 
 world at the beginning of the war. 
 
 However, the cures at Lourdes are so striking, so 
 contrary to the laws of Nature, that for some years 
 now it has been impossible to treat them as purely 
 negligible. The moment has arrived when doctors 
 will not content themselves with prejudiced discus¬ 
 sions and insufficient arguments. They have under¬ 
 stood, in the first place, that definitely to refute the 
 facts much study is needed, that these phenomena 
 necessitate being observed on the spot, and as far as 
 
THE DOCTORS 103 
 
 possible at the time of their production, before they 
 can state that they are truths or errors. 
 
 This is why the number of medical men who refuse 
 to follow blindly ready-made opinions, who wish to 
 see and examine for themselves, increases year by 
 year, and explains the considerable and incontestable 
 movement of the medical world in favour of Lourdes. 
 
 Since 1892—that is, during the last thirty years— 
 seven thousand eight hundred and twenty-eight 
 doctors have passed through the Medical Bureau. I 
 subjoin the number of colleagues who have been in¬ 
 scribed in the register of the Bureau for each year. 
 
 
 Doctors. 
 
 1892 
 
 . 120 
 
 1893 
 
 . ^9 
 
 1894 
 
 . 160 
 
 189s 
 
 . 177 
 
 1896 
 
 . 203 
 
 1897 
 
 . 112 
 
 1898 
 
 . 200 
 
 1899 
 
 . 240 
 
 1900 
 
 . 216 
 
 1901 
 
 . 3 2 8 
 
 1902 
 
 . 268 
 
 1903 
 
 . 228 
 
 1904 
 
 . 245 
 
 1905 
 
 . 274 
 
 1906 
 
 . 280 
 
 Carried forward 3,170 
 
 Doctors. 
 
 Brough t forward 
 
 3 > I 7 ° 
 
 1907 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • * 
 
 332 
 
 1908 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • • 
 
 624 
 
 1909 
 
 M • 
 
 « • • 
 
 446 
 
 1910 
 
 
 
 478 
 
 1911 
 
 
 
 536 
 
 1912 
 
 • • • 
 
 
 568 
 
 1913 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • • 
 
 670 
 
 I 9 I 4 
 
 • • ft 
 
 
 227 
 
 1915 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 1916 
 
 
 • • • 
 
 10 
 
 1917 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 1918 
 
 ft ft ft 
 
 • • • 
 
 18 
 
 1919 
 
 ft ft ft 
 
 • • • 
 
 99 
 
 1920 
 
 • • • 
 
 
 239 
 
 1921 
 
 • • • 
 
 Total 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • • 
 
 400 
 
 7,828 
 
 As can be seen, the numbers reached their highest 
 total in 1913, when they amounted to six hundred and 
 seventy. This movement was arrested during the 
 World War, as the majority of the doctors were 
 mobilised. 
 
io4 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 However, since that time both doctors and pilgrims, 
 despite the difficulties of the journey, have recom¬ 
 menced the visits to our sanctuaries. Although a 
 large number were retained by the necessity of build¬ 
 ing up their practices again, yet in 1921 we received 
 as many as four hundred. Of this number foreigners 
 constituted about one-third, and we can count pro¬ 
 fessors, surgeons, doctors of hospital staffs, etc., 
 coming from all nationalities. 
 
 All without exception have expressed themselves as 
 extremely pleased with the fraternal courtesy which 
 exists at our meetings. All have felicitated us on the 
 careful and scrupulous manner in which our enquiries 
 are conducted. All have declared themselves so inter¬ 
 ested, that they have promised to return during the 
 following years. 
 
 II 
 
 Though the number of our collaborators increases, 
 recruited as it is from the regular visitors to the 
 Bureau, from those passing through Lourdes, and 
 those drawn by the attraction of the unknown, yet 
 still unfortunately too many keep away. The latter, 
 afraid of being enlightened, or perhaps dazzled by 
 too bright a light, still prefer to keep company with 
 unbelief and free thought. 4 ‘What need is there to 
 go and see ? In the centuries of ignorance and super¬ 
 stition one might indulge in such pleasantries. But 
 to-day such things do not merit attention. Is not 
 Science capable of unmasking these impostures ? 
 What occurs at Lourdes, does it not also occur at the 
 Salpetriere? Only there the same facts take place 
 without noise and advertisement! And then, we 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 105 
 
 cannot be certain of the miraculous, since it is a dero¬ 
 gation of the laws of Nature, and we cannot know all 
 her laws.” 
 
 One would never believe the specious arguments 
 that preconceived ideas and prejudice can furnish to 
 men of science to support their incredulity, and pre¬ 
 vent them from occupying themselves with the ques¬ 
 tion of Lourdes. 
 
 For these savants, since the supernatural obtains 
 results contrary to admitted laws, and a 'priori one 
 cannot admit any such derogation of law, every super¬ 
 natural fact which is opposed to pathological and 
 physiological laws is impossible. 
 
 In their studies doctors for the most part pursue a 
 rigorous method of observation: they remain within 
 the limits indicated by the analysis of facts, scrutinise 
 these facts, register most carefully and patiently the 
 results of these observations, and from these draw 
 definite conclusions and derive accurate teaching. 
 
 But as soon as it is a question of Lourdes, for the 
 doctors I am now considering, there is no study of 
 the facts, no experimental observation. Silence and 
 abstention seem to them sufficient. When some 
 miraculous account comes from the banks of the Gave, 
 they obstinately shut their eyes and turn their heads 
 away. They will not even consent to take notice of 
 the accounts presented to them. Again they repeat, 
 the supposed facts about which there is discussion are 
 absurd, therefore they are impossible. 
 
 The mere mention of Lourdes obscures the eyes and 
 intellects of some doctors, so that they appear to be 
 attacked with a species of phobia. Human respect is 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 106 
 
 really the main reason which prevents them studying 
 the question; this hypnotises them and makes them 
 keep silence, for they consider the miraculous as an 
 unwarranted intrusion of the Primal Cause into the 
 domain of Science, of which they believe themselves 
 to be the infallible interpreters. When it is not from 
 fear of having to change their mode of life, it is 
 usually human respect which causes doctors to elimin¬ 
 ate a priori divine intervention in such matters : they 
 purposely avoid study and research in a territory 
 which they consider somewhat dangerous. With an 
 eixaggerated deference for the opinions of others, they 
 remain in the shade and keep silence. If they were 
 led by chance where they would discover the truth, 
 they would be afraid of being laughed at; conse¬ 
 quently they prefer to say nothing one way or another. 
 
 On September 4, 1903, Madame Rouchel, a resident 
 of Metz, arrived at Lourdes on pilgrimage. This un¬ 
 fortunate woman had suffered for the previous nine 
 years from a terrible lupus of the face. The nose, 
 the upper lip, the right cheek were attacked, and the 
 discharge was abundant and foetid. In addition 
 there were two perforations which permitted the pas¬ 
 sage of the tip of the little finger—one in the right 
 cheek, the other in the palate; these allowed food both 
 to escape externally and into the nose. All these 
 chronic and well-authenticated lesions were instan¬ 
 taneously cured one afternoon in the Church of the 
 Rosary; the loss of substance which I have just 
 described was suddenly made good. 
 
 This important case naturally attracted the atten¬ 
 tion of the doctors of Metz, who held several meetings 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 107 
 
 to discuss the matter without taking account of 
 the opinion of Dr. Ernst, who had attended and 
 treated the case, nor of other certain evidence, they 
 maintained that because a very small amount of ulcera¬ 
 tion still remained on the internal aspect of the upper 
 lip the cure did not exist, and that the simple 
 amelioration observed could be perfectly explained by 
 a natural process. These doctors of Metz did not 
 say a word about the instantaneous cicatrisation of 
 the perforations in the cheek and palate, and they 
 attributed the cause of the skin lesion to syphilis. 
 The cure, they said, was obtained by an active anti¬ 
 syphilitic treatment. 
 
 A very lively discussion followed this curious 
 judgement, and Dr. Boissarie discussed the affair 
 with his Lorraine colleagues. It was then agreed to 
 refer the matter to experts. The President of the 
 Bureau wished to submit the question to Dr. Besnier, 
 former President of the Academy of Medicine, and to 
 Professor Fournier, who was on the staff of the Hos¬ 
 pital of St Louis. 
 
 Well, the result was that both these two experts 
 refused to have anything to do with the question. 
 
 On June 9, 1905, Dr. Besnier replied in the follow¬ 
 ing terms to Dr. Boissarie’s report: “My dear col¬ 
 league—I have decided to decline the position of 
 expert, and to let it rest at that. I do not find in an 
 extemporised and purely clinical examination suffi¬ 
 cient ground on which to base a definite judgement.” 
 
 Dr. Boissarie, in a letter to a medical friend, gave 
 the following account of his visit to Professor 
 Fournier: “ I remained an hour with the Professor. 
 
io8 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 I definitely explained to him the reasons why I 
 demanded his opinion, but I was unable to persuade 
 him to either give a definite decision or to take notice 
 of the evidence. The Professor was inclined to the 
 diagnosis of syphilis, but he made restrictions as to 
 the perforation of the cheek, a rare occurrence with 
 specific trouble. As to the mode of the cure and its 
 rapidity, he declined any pronouncement. * For 
 you,’ he said, * that would be a miracle. But that is 
 not a question for me; I do not wish to enter into that 
 domain.’ He remained mute as the Sphinx, fearing 
 above all to commit himself in any way. At the end 
 of the interview he said to me: ‘ I do not wish to 
 pronounce either for the doctors of Metz, or for you.’ ” 
 
 I may say that very fortunately Drs. Tennesson and 
 du Castel, members of the Academy of Medicine, had 
 no such fears, and did not refuse an opinion asked of 
 them in the interests of truth. Both these distin¬ 
 guished men declared that the affection was certainly 
 not syphilitic. 
 
 During the summer of 19— an exceedingly well- 
 known scientific man was at Lourdes. The wife of 
 this savant, in gratitude to the Immaculate Virgin for 
 the protection of her son during the war, had obtained 
 from her husband the promise to stay for a couple of 
 days at Lourdes on their return from an excursion in 
 the Pyrenees. He was present at the moving spec¬ 
 tacle of the crowds in prayer, of the ardent supplica¬ 
 tions of the sick and infirm, but simply as an 
 indifferent spectator. At the end of the first day he 
 said he had had enough of these manifestations, and 
 that it was time to go. However, at the urgent 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 109 
 
 request of his wife, who reminded him of his promise, 
 he replied : “ Ah, well, I will wait the other day that 
 I promised. During this last day I will go to the 
 Medical Bureau; I shall not be sorry to see a little of 
 what passes there/* 
 
 This proposal of his was brought to me by a friend 
 who knew the incredulous scientist, and I prepared to 
 receive him cordially. 
 
 I saw him on the afternoon of that day striding 
 several times up and down the avenue of chestnuts 
 which shade the front of the Bureau, but he did not 
 cross the threshold. 
 
 May we not suppose that human respect and fear 
 of the truth annihilated the will and reasoning powers 
 of the men of whom I have spoken ? This fear of 
 compromising themselves by merely pronouncing the 
 name of Lourdes is only too real. 
 
 Some few years ago, in a provincial Faculty, a can¬ 
 didate for the doctorate presented as his thesis a work 
 entitled The Cures of Lourdes. The four members 
 of the jury congratulated him on the importance of 
 the work, which in their eyes was considerably above 
 the level of the ordinary theses, but in the course of 
 the discussion they objected that the work had “ an 
 emotional and supernatural side, with which the 
 Faculty had nothing to do/’ Despite the brilliant 
 refutation by the candidate of all the objections 
 brought forward, the jury declared that the thesis did 
 not show sufficient scientific characters, and it was 
 unanimously refused by all the members, including 
 the President , who three weeks before had signed 
 permission for the thesis to be printed ! 
 
I 10 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 This surprising decision caused, a short time after, 
 an official protest before the Dean of the Faculty on 
 the part of the Students’ Association. 
 
 Our Universities consider the facts of Lourdes un¬ 
 worthy of all discussion and examination. They 
 much prefer to shut themselves up in silence and 
 supreme indifference, rather than run the risk of hav¬ 
 ing to acknowledge that there are facts which the 
 laws of pathology and physiology are quite unable to 
 explain. 
 
 In this connection I may cite another example of 
 official ostracism, shown with regard to the facts of 
 Lourdes by some of our University authorities. In 
 this case, however, the event was followed by quite 
 unforeseen consequences. 
 
 About the end of 1900 the young Dr. Alexis Carel, 
 who was a prosector in the Faculty of Medicine at 
 Lyons, became very interested in Dr. Boissarie’s book 
 The Cures of Lourdes. He acknowledged his sur¬ 
 prise on reading of the instantaneous union of an 
 ununited fracture, of the sudden disappearance of a 
 cancer of the tongue, of the immediate cicatrisation of 
 an ulcer 30 centimetres in length. These facts were 
 the more interesting because they permitted those who 
 were searching for the truth to make a series of im¬ 
 portant deductions and conclusions. 
 
 He resolved then to study on the spot analogous 
 phenomena which experience and known laws con¬ 
 sider as impossible. 
 
 To do this he accompanied as doctor the pilgrimage 
 of 1902 from Lyons. Very interested in the case of a 
 young girl from Lyons who for three years had been 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 in 
 
 under treatment in the hospitals, he kept her carefully 
 in view during the journey. At Lourdes, at the Hos¬ 
 pital, Grotto, and Bureau, he was a witness of the 
 cure of this patient, and he noted hour by hour, 
 minute by minute, the changes that occurred under his 
 eyes. It is, as it were, a resurrection he describes 
 scientifically, ‘ ‘ eliminating all explanation from his 
 thought and pen.” 
 
 The case is that of the instantaneous cure of Marie 
 Bailly reported by Dr. Boissarie. 1 She suffered from 
 tuberculosis of the lungs and peritoneum. 
 
 Our archives preserve the most detailed and pre¬ 
 cise notes made by the young Lyons doctor from day 
 to day between May 26 and June 4, 1902. There 
 are also notes inscribed after the cure, at the return 
 to Lyons, from June 7 to August 8. At the latter 
 date the “ miraculee ” quitted the Hospital, and was 
 accepted as a novice by the Sisters of St. Vincent de 
 Paul. “ In view of the symptoms observed, the per¬ 
 sonal and family history, the diagnosis of such a 
 well-known surgeon as Dr. Gouilloud, I also made 
 the diagnosis of tuberculous peritonitis. As a matter 
 of fact, no other hypothesis was possible.” 
 
 “ At the end of July the patient was entirely cured. 
 Her weight increases a kilogramme a week. General 
 health perfect.” 
 
 Such are the notes beginning and closing this 
 report, in which Dr. Carel noted all the symptoms 
 and phenomena as a witness. 
 
 His observations are made in the most scrupulously 
 scientific fashion; he makes no remarks, deduces no 
 1 Les Gutrisons de Lourdes , 2 partie, p. 58. 
 
112 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 conclusion, but it is easy to see by the report that the 
 event which he witnessed made a most deep impression. 
 
 This case was certainly the beginning of the change 
 in his life which led to his becoming the future 
 Director of the Rockefeller Medical Institute. Had 
 it not been for Lourdes, Dr. Carel would not in all 
 probability have undertaken the remarkable work 
 which has made him known all over the world, and 
 of which Dr. Philippon gives an account in No. 36 of 
 the review Science and Life, January, 1918. 
 
 Here is the account which Dr. Philippon puts into 
 the mouth of the celebrated surgeon P-, of Cler¬ 
 
 mont-Ferrand : 
 
 Some twenty years ago, a young girl of twelve or 
 thirteen years of age was brought to Dr. Carel, suffer¬ 
 ing from a chronic abscess in the right iliac fossa, and 
 up to this time no treatment had been of any avail. 
 Carel in his turn essayed all the resources of medicine 
 and surgery, but without any satisfactory result. In 
 despair he advised taking the child to Lourdes, and 
 this advice was immediately followed. 
 
 A little time after, during a dinner at which were 
 present the principal members of the Medical 
 Faculty, one of the guests sitting near Carel asked 
 him what had become of his little patient. “ I have 
 sent her to Lourdes,” replied Carel, smiling. His 
 reply was greeted with a general laugh. “You 
 believe in that sort of treatment?” someone asked. 
 “ Really,” replied Carel, “ it was necessary to do 
 something ! But what is curious is that no later than 
 this morning I have seen this child returned from 
 Lourdes, and what will seem to you most extra- 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 ”3 
 
 ordinary is that she is cured.” “ What is that you 
 are saying?” “ Yes, she is cured, definitely and 
 completely cured ! Lourdes has succeeded in three 
 or four days where we all failed; there is something 
 which approaches the category of the miraculous.” 
 This last word caused a chilling silence, and Carel 
 replied : “ Please note carefully that I neither explain 
 nor discuss. I content myself with stating the facts.” 
 
 Professor C- then said: “It is useless to insist, 
 
 sir, that with views such as those you can never be 
 received as a member of our Faculty.” “In that 
 case,” replied Carel, “ I must go elsewhere. I 
 believe that there are places where I shall be more 
 cordially received.” 
 
 He did as he had said, left Lyons and went to 
 America, where it was not long before he became 
 famous. 
 
 Such was the chance incident which put Carel on 
 the road to success and celebrity. 
 
 To keep Lourdes as much in the shade as possible, 
 blind sectarianism and irreconcilable hatred do the 
 most strange and unjust acts. 
 
 About the end of August, 1921, Le Petit Mar¬ 
 seillais, although it is not in the habit of so doing, 
 published the following lines taken from its con¬ 
 temporary, Le Soleil du Midi: 
 
 “ A Marseilles Doctor Testifies to a Cure 
 
 at Lourdes 
 
 “ Our contemporary, Le Soleil du Midi, published 
 the following, which we reproduce: 
 
 “‘One of our most popular Marseilles medical 
 
 8 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 114 
 
 men, Dr. Gabriel Coulange, has written to us that 
 he was called to examine a miraculous cure at 
 Lourdes. 
 
 “ ‘ The case concerned was one well known to our 
 readers, that of Mademoiselle Emilie Cailleux, who, 
 we are glad to say, is now in the most satisfactory 
 condition.’ The journal continued: 
 
 “‘This person, said the doctor, was suddenly 
 cured of Pott’s disease on August 19th last, about 
 three o’clock in the afternoon, whilst praying before 
 the Grotto. At the Medical Bureau she was examined 
 for three-quarters of an hour by Drs. Pineau, Goret, 
 Gony, and Coulange, was found to have no trace of 
 disease, and was declared instantaneously and com¬ 
 pletely cured.’ 
 
 “ This publication of Le Petit Marseillais did not 
 please Dr. Monteux, the President of the Associa¬ 
 tion of Marseilles Doctors, and at a meeting of their 
 Council which took place on September 15, 1921, he 
 brought the article in question to the notice of the 
 members. This is how the official organ of the Mar¬ 
 seilles Doctors’ Association referred to the matter: 
 
 “ * Dr. Monteux spoke of the article in Le Petit 
 Marseillais referring to Dr. Coulange, and after some 
 discussion said that he noticed with regret that a 
 doctor had allowed an anti-scientific article to be 
 inserted in the daily Press. Certain members of the 
 Association supported the President.’ 
 
 “ This act caused a disagreeable surprise to the 
 majority of the Marseilles medical men. The action 
 of Dr. Monteux was certainly an abuse of his posi¬ 
 tion, for a professional association does not concern 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 H 5 
 
 itself with the politics, philosophy, or religious beliefs 
 of its members. But, above all, it was unjust and 
 absurd. An anti-scientific article! Truly anti¬ 
 clerical hatred is both blind and despotic. Is it not 
 precisely in the name of Science that so many un¬ 
 believing doctors have tried to explain the Lourdes 
 cures ? Then why refuse the same right to Catholics 
 in the name of Science ? In any case, to grant it to 
 one and refuse it to another is pure sectarianism. 
 
 “ What increases the unfairness of Dr. Monteux’s 
 attack, is that Dr. Coulange had not attempted to 
 give an explanation of the instantaneous cure of 
 Mademoiselle Cailleux; he had contented himself 
 with a record of what he had seen and examined. It 
 is a fact that he recounts, an event that took place on 
 such a day, at such an hour, at a definite spot, a fact 
 which he himself had witnessed. 
 
 “ Is it anti-scientific to witness to a definite fact ? 
 
 “ The evidence of Dr. Coulange has the more force 
 in that it was corroborated by three other doctors, 
 who examined the patient for three-quarters of an 
 hour, and could find no trace of the malady. Is this 
 minute and prolonged examination by four scientific 
 men anti-scientific? 
 
 “ Undoubtedly the action of the President of the 
 Marseilles doctors was unjust and an abuse of his 
 position. 
 
 “ See what sectarianism leads to. But sometimes 
 it receives the reward that it merits, and this is what 
 happened at Marseilles. It would seem that the 
 intolerance of Dr. Monteux was not altogether to the 
 taste of the Marseilles medical profession, for their 
 
ii6 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 Association had recently to re-elect its officers, and 
 Dr. Monteux, the outgoing President, received only 
 45 votes out 280, the remaining votes going to his 
 successor. It was an act of justice; perhaps the irre- 
 concilables will learn that enmity to the supernatural 
 and to Lourdes does not always bring good 
 fortune . ,,1 
 
 The cure of Mademoiselle Emilie Cailleux was one 
 of special importance in that the diagnosis in her 
 case had been made by Professor Lecene, of Paris, 
 under whose treatment the young girl had rested for 
 two years, and it was the same professor who had 
 signed her certificate when she set out for Lourdes. 
 
 The doctors of Marseilles, in giving such a strong 
 majority against the re-election of Dr. Monteux, 
 implicitly testified that the events of Lourdes are 
 not so devoid of a scientific character as the adver¬ 
 saries of the supernatural would fain believe, but are 
 indeed worthy of the attention of the world of science. 
 
 Ill 
 
 Having discussed the question of the systematic 
 abstention of certain doctors from taking any notice 
 of the cures at Lourdes, it will now be appropriate to 
 consider the question of the medical certificates. 
 
 This question of the certificates is one of the most 
 difficult that we have to deal with at the Bureau. 
 When a cure occurs, and the “ miracule ” is brought 
 to the Bureau, immediately there is anxiety to see 
 the patient’s report, with the desire naturally of find¬ 
 ing there all the necessary indications as to the malady 
 
 1 La Croix de Paris. 
 
 \ 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 ii 7 
 
 and the patient’s state before the cure. The hope is 
 that by means of good certificates and reports it will 
 be easy to pronounce as to the certitude of the cure. 
 Alas ! how many times we are disappointed, finding 
 the certificates of practically no value at all. 
 
 I do not, of course, mean to say that the majority 
 of medical men are afraid to put their signature to 
 anything which can serve as the basis for establishing 
 a supernatural fact; fortunately, there are a large 
 number, a very large number , of colleagues who are 
 convinced of the importance of their role, who think 
 of the possible use that may be made of their signa¬ 
 ture, have no hesitation in stating the full technical 
 details, and relate the whole pathological history of 
 the patient they have attended and studied. These 
 give a definite and precise diagnosis; in a word, they 
 recognise their responsibility, and do not recoil from 
 it. But it is difficult to form an idea of the number 
 of doctors who, as a colleague said to me the other 
 day, are seized with “ agraphia,” loss of ability to 
 write, when it is a question of Lourdes. This 
 incapacity is a well-known malady, which consists 
 in lack of power to express thought in writing. 
 There are a number of men who are unable to use 
 pencil, pen, or stylograph when they are asked for a 
 certificate in view of a pilgrimage. “ What an idea 
 that doctors should be mixed up in such affairs ! 
 What would my colleagues say if they saw that Dr. 
 So-and-so had put his name to a certificate of that 
 sort? To pass for a clerical or an idiot—never!” 
 These are some of the fears that obsess doctors when 
 they refuse to make any declaration, to give any 
 
118 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 details about their patients. Sometimes to obtain 
 from the doctor the necessary certificate, without 
 which admission to a pilgrimage is refused, all sorts 
 of ruses have to be employed and the strangest 
 motives alleged. 
 
 Here is a letter which I possess, addressed to his 
 parents by a young man who sought to obtain a cer¬ 
 tificate for his sister from a Parisian doctor: “ I went 
 to Dr. Z-; I told a deliberate lie to get the certifi¬ 
 
 cate, but he absolutely refused to say what was my 
 sister’s illness. He pretended that it would be a 
 breach of professional confidence to write the name of 
 the disease. Not being able to obtain it, I told him 
 the motive for the certificate, but without any better 
 success.” 
 
 This refusal on the part of prejudiced or sceptical 
 doctors, according to my way of thinking, shows the 
 fear they have of contributing their quota to the docu¬ 
 ments of the Medical Bureau, which they know, in 
 spite of everything, have definite scientific value. 
 They dread bringing the supernatural to the light of 
 day, thinking uneasily of the opinions of their patients 
 and colleagues. For their signature placed on such a 
 document might perhaps be fraught with serious con¬ 
 sequences with regard to their colleagues and their 
 practice. 
 
 When the circumstances are such that a certificate 
 cannot be refused, and they are, as it were, constrained 
 by force to give evidence, then they essay to be very 
 diplomatic; their aim then is to say as little as pos¬ 
 sible in order not to compromise themselves. How 
 hard it is for some people to be frank and open ! 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 119 
 
 They purposely choose vague, inaccurate, confused 
 terms, which are no assistance to those who examine 
 the case, but leave a way of escape for themselves. 
 
 Instead of giving even laconically the details, 
 diagnosis, description of symptoms, main morbid 
 changes, treatment followed, and the prognosis, too 
 many hide themselves behind a complicated phrase- 
 ology, and voluntarily give incomplete certificates 
 Our archives contain many examples where the cer¬ 
 tificates seem to have been given by men absolutely 
 terrified of entering upon this compromising and dan 
 gerous territory. 
 
 A doctor of the Midi definitely said to me that he 
 had given a certificate for Lourdes which he had pur¬ 
 posely made short and vague, for, he said, “ it is 
 exceedingly annoying, if there is a miracle, to see 
 your colleagues pulling your diagnosis to pieces.’* 
 
 By the side of these timorous people we find the 
 cynics. Some years ago at the annual seance held 
 at the Bon Theatre on the Quai de Passy, the example 
 was given of a doctor who was the mayor of his com¬ 
 mune, and a Freemason of high rank. Being asked 
 to give a certificate for one of his patients going to 
 Lourdes, he wrote as follows: “I, the undersigned, 
 
 X-, Doctor in Medicine, certify that Madame 
 
 Z- is suffering from a malady, the nature and 
 
 gravity of which my political and philosophical 
 opinions hinder me from determining.” 
 
 Another example: I received last summer (1922) a 
 visit from a patient who brought the following cer¬ 
 tificate from his doctor: “I, the undersigned, . . . 
 certify that Monsieur Y-is ill.” 
 
120 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 It is easy to understand that it is impossible to do 
 anything with a cure which brings statements of this 
 kind; but there are others which, while not being so 
 absurdly negative, whether voluntarily or not, abso¬ 
 lutely lack all accuracy and precision. 
 
 I have under my eyes a certain number of these 
 certificates, of which I give some specimens: 
 
 “ I have had under my care Madame X-, who 
 
 for two years has been suffering from an obstinate 
 cough.” 
 
 ” Mademoiselle Z- presents on examination a 
 
 deformity of the left foot.” 
 
 ” The young A- is constantly ill, and two 
 
 operations have not; cured him.” 
 
 * ‘ I certify that I have had under my care for several 
 
 years Madame B- for a chronic affection, which 
 
 I think might be spontaneously cured.” 
 
 In this fashion one does not say too much, and in 
 case of a cure at Lourdes there is ample room to 
 escape. One does not incur the danger of being 
 forced on the return of the patient to recognise the 
 disappearance of a malady when no information had 
 been given about it. By this method one does not 
 run the risk of such a misadventure as happened to a 
 doctor of whom Dr. Boissarie speaks. He had 
 declared his patient to be consumptive. Moreover, 
 he had confirmed this diagnosis by telegram. She 
 was completely cured at Lourdes. On her return she 
 obtained a certificate from this doctor attesting that 
 she had been cured, but of a simple cold. 
 
 It is very embarrassing to have to go back on one’s 
 statement. But this does not trouble some practi- 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 121 
 
 tioners, who, rather than acknowledge the truth, make 
 a cowardly retreat, and sign statements which they 
 know are erroneous. 
 
 If we encounter these difficulties from some doctors 
 when the patient sets out for Lourdes, the difficulty is 
 even greater when they have returned cured, and 
 desire a certificate to that effect. Some few years ago 
 a Doctor in Medicine, by a certificate dated in the 
 month of July, 19—, declared that a child who was a 
 patient of his, and whom he had treated for a long 
 time, had Pott’s disease of the dorso-lumbar spine, 
 and also an abscess which discharged in the groin. 
 He described all the classical symptoms of the 
 disease, and left no doubt as to its nature and gravity. 
 
 The child was taken to Lourdes, where he was sud¬ 
 denly cured of the spinal disease, and at the same 
 time the abscess ceased to discharge. On his return 
 the doctor examined his little patient, and in the 
 August following, being asked to give a certificate, 
 wrote as follows : ‘ ‘ The orifice of the abscess is com¬ 
 pletely cicatrised, all the movements of the spine are 
 re-established, and can be performed without diffi¬ 
 culty or pain, and the child is actually now in a very 
 satisfactory condition.” But he then went on to 
 add : “ This favourable result may occur normally in 
 a case of Pott’s disease. Moreover, I wish to state 
 that I gave the previous certificate on the demand of 
 "the family, who stated that it was a necessity. I con¬ 
 sider it of only slight importance, for I wrote it in 
 haste, and in terms which might be wrongly inter¬ 
 preted.” 
 
 Doctor P-, one of our most skilled and devoted 
 
122 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 collaborators, arrived at Lourdes with a recent French 
 National Pilgrimage, and was present at the cure of a 
 
 young girl from the Diocese of M-. On his return 
 
 to the chief town of the diocese, he visited the doctor 
 who had attended the young “ miraculee ” and had 
 given her the certificate. “ You remember the patient 
 
 you saw last month, Mary T-? Isn’t it correct 
 
 that she certainly had hip disease?” “ Typical hip 
 disease .” “Well, she is cured!” “What do you 
 say—cured?” “Yes, she was cured in the piscine 
 at Lourdes. I examined her on tl\£ morning of her 
 arrival there, and the following day I happened to be 
 in the Medical Bureau when the cure was certified.” 
 “Oh, that does not astonish me. I always con¬ 
 sidered her as a case that might very well be cured at 
 Lourdes !” 
 
 When it was announced to. another doctor that one 
 of his patients who suffered from tuberculous joint 
 disease had been cured, and his opinion was asked 
 about the case, he wrote the following lines: 
 
 “ Madame X-was placed in a plaster splint, and 
 
 continuous extension applied, but with a view of sug¬ 
 gestion, for I had always regarded her as an hysterical 
 subject.” To immobilise a woman in plaster, and 
 apply extension during some months, to “ sug- 
 gestionise ’ ’ her, is not this something of a discovery ? 
 
 A doctor was charged to make a report as to the 
 state of health of the unfortunate victim of an acci¬ 
 dent; after having minutely described the various 
 lesions produced, he concluded that the diagnosis 
 was certain, the prognosis very grave. On a second 
 examination he stated that the patient would be an 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 123 
 
 invalid for the remainder of his life. Finally he 
 stated that although it was impossible to assign a 
 definite time for the survival of the injured person, 
 yet he did not consider that this could be of long 
 duration. 
 
 However, the invalid, taken to Lourdes in extremis , 
 instantaneously recovered his health. On this occa¬ 
 sion the doctor was much put about. Called to give 
 evidence in the case of his patient, who< had changed 
 so suddenly and radically in spite of the gloomy 
 prognosis, he was unable to deny the cure. But he 
 declared that he had made an error; there were, how¬ 
 ever, extenuating circumstances: “ I was, it is true, 
 deceived. But I was not alone. All the doctors who 
 saw the case were, like me, deceived. Everybody 
 was deceived.’* 
 
 How was he deceived ? He does not say, but he 
 tries to explain. What happened? “ This is what 
 must have happened. Some of the symptoms can be 
 considered as . . . doctors can be led into error.” 
 To sum up, all these restatements and hesitations 
 have but one end in view, to lead to the following 
 
 conclusion: “The cure of Mr. X- has nothing 
 
 supernatural about it. Some of the symptoms can be 
 considered as hysterical manifestations. On the 
 other hand, some symptoms might have been caused 
 by classical lesions, but here other doctors as well as 
 myself may have been mistaken. The patient was 
 certainly a nervous subject, and his return to health 
 was the result of a shock, the considerable effect pro¬ 
 duced upon him by the crowds and the general effect 
 of Lourdes.” 
 
124 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 You must, however, be just. One day you state 
 that the patient’s condition is hopeless, that both 
 Nature and science can do nothing for the grave 
 lesions that are present, whose nature you describe. 
 You let it be known that the fatal termination is not 
 far off: then suddenly the following day, by a con¬ 
 tradiction passing strange, because the cure goes con¬ 
 trary to your theories and preconceived views, you 
 affirm without hesitation that this cure has nothing 
 extraordinary about it. 
 
 Another type of doctor is he who, not wishing to 
 admit the miraculous, is yet unwilling to go back on 
 his word, to contradict to-day what he said yesterday. 
 Many of these, however, for fear of being obliged to 
 give a definite opinion, steal out of the way when 
 occasion is presented to them for judging. 
 
 The subject of a cure, which had made considerable 
 sensation, wrote to one of the doctors who had 
 treated her, appointing a definite place and time for 
 him to judge the change in her state of health. He 
 kept her waiting some days for the reply, which 
 stated: “I have learnt with real satisfaction the 
 change for the better that has occurred in your con¬ 
 dition. I shall be happy to think of you in a good 
 state of health, instead of picturing the unfortunate 
 individual who was under my care. . . . Very many 
 thanks for your kind invitation. It would have given 
 me great pleasure to congratulate you personally, but 
 my work gives me no time for a break, consequently 
 I shall be unable to see you. Believe me,” etc. 
 
 I could multiply the examples I have given to a 
 very considerable extent. Those who have read them 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 125 
 
 will see the difficulties we have to encounter at the 
 Medical Bureau in order to obtain the necessary 
 technical evidence. At the same time, however, 
 besides these documents which leave very much to be 
 desired, there are hundreds of complete and conscien¬ 
 tious reports in our archives, which contain all the 
 details necessary. Many of these are supplemented 
 by analyses, radiographs, accounts of laboratory 
 research, etc. They constitute models of case-taking, 
 and some in our archives may be said to be as near 
 perfection as is possible. 
 
 IV 
 
 The doctors who visit our Bureau each year, to 
 examine and enquire into the subject of the cures 
 there, may be divided into several categories. 
 
 There are, in the first place, the doctors who are 
 believers; these are not ashamed to declare that their 
 science cannot explain the cures of Lourdes, and do 
 not hesitate to say that the cause must be sought 
 higher. They are in complete accord with, and join 
 in the thanksgiving of, the pilgrims to the Queen of 
 Heaven for the cures granted there. 
 
 But it must not be supposed for one instant that 
 these doctors have the faith of a charcoal-burner, and 
 are disposed to admit supernatural facts without con¬ 
 trol or examination, that they are inclined to see the 
 supernatural in all the cases submitted to them. 
 
 For the most part this class of doctors who visit the 
 Bureau are exacting and severe, more so even than 
 the indifferent and incredulous, when it is a question 
 of affirming “ a miracle.’* 
 
126 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 Very often it is from the side of the believers that 
 the most objections arise; they are usually inclined to 
 see insufficient guarantees in the cases put before 
 them. 
 
 Boissarie cites the case of a young doctor, who was 
 witness of a cure, or rather of a resurrection, which 
 had been under his care for several months. 1 It con¬ 
 cerned a young girl whose case was deemed abso¬ 
 lutely hopeless, but who was cured : the young doctor 
 had all the notes of the case, and he set about writing 
 the report of the cure. He had followed the malady 
 from its commencement, and consequently could have 
 no doubt. Suddenly, however, he was attacked by 
 scruples; the memory of classical cases of the same 
 disease returned to him, and he thought of the 
 common belief that only nervous diseases can be the 
 object of supernatural cures. These thoughts over¬ 
 came his first impressions. He demanded more time 
 before pronouncing on the matter. But more time 
 meant more worry, and he became obsessed with the 
 idea that he had not the capacity of making an im¬ 
 partial judgement. At the end he entrusted all the 
 notes of the case to a friend, asking him to draw up 
 the report according to his conscience, and not to be 
 influenced by his first opinion. 
 
 This case reported by the two doctors is one of the 
 fullest and most accurate that we have in our archives. 
 
 I ask again, what statistics are there based on more 
 accurate and scrupulous reports ? 
 
 1 Boissarie, Renaissance religieuse dans le corps medical, 
 Annales de N. D. de Lourdes, tome 36, p. 113. 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 127 
 
 V 
 
 Another category we welcome at the Bureau are 
 those who do not know. Among these we sometimes 
 meet ignorance that is truly amazing. During the 
 month of September a few years ago a Parisian col¬ 
 league presented himself. After the usual greetings 
 he said to me: “ Ever since my arrival here, the con¬ 
 versation seems to turn about one subject. Everybody 
 here speaks of * our Lady of Lourdes.’ . . . This 
 Lady of Lourdes, this Virgin they invoke, is Berna¬ 
 dette Soubirous, isn’t it?” 
 
 But though not ignorant to this extent, a large 
 number of doctors arrive in the little Pyrenean town 
 without knowing exactly what passes there, and with¬ 
 out having the least idea that close to the miraculous 
 Grotto there is a clinic which is in some measure 
 without parallel, and that there they can observe the 
 most interesting and rare cases. 
 
 My own example is a proof of this statement: until 
 I accompanied the National Pilgrimage for the first 
 time, I was in a state of tranquil indifference, and 
 ignorance which bordered almost on scepticism. It 
 was without the slightest enthusiasm, and only after 
 some hesitation, that I decided to go. It was not 
 that I was incredulous, but I did not like crowds of 
 people, and it seemed to me that the agitation and 
 noisy manifestations of crowds were little in harmony 
 with the recollection that should accompany acts of 
 piety. 
 
 From the start, however, as a convinced Catholic, 
 I was moved, more than I can say, at the splendid 
 
128 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 manifestations of faith, the wonderful examples of 
 charity, and the true fraternity that existed there. 
 As doctor, my professional interest was soon aroused 
 by the presence of interesting and rare cases; by these 
 masses of sick people, in some of whom the agony 
 seemed almost to have commenced—the whole form¬ 
 ing a spectacle it was impossible to forget, and diffi¬ 
 cult to contemplate without emotion. 
 
 From the moment that I was introduced to Dr. 
 Boissarie, whose friendly and cordial greeting I shall 
 never forget, I, so to speak, scarcely left the Bureau, 
 the existence of which up to that time I had totally 
 ignored. There I found myself immediately in direct 
 contact with the supernatural. My medical know¬ 
 ledge was completely upset by coming in contact with 
 cases who had been previously cured, whose reports 
 I was enabled to study at leisure, and which my good 
 faith obliged me to conclude had been cured in a 
 manner which passed the comprehension of human 
 intelligence. 
 
 Since that time I have encountered many medical 
 men who had not even heard of the Bureau, or if they 
 had it was only vaguely, or to get false notions about 
 it. That is why I am so keenly desirous to see the 
 Bureau more frequented by our colleagues, so that 
 they may make known the facts of Lourdes to the 
 medical profession at large. 
 
 VI 
 
 Amongst our visitors there are also many who do 
 not believe . Of this number there are some who 
 arrive with their minds made up. They are abso- 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 129 
 
 lutely determined to rest where they are. They will 
 not see or look at anything. They neither interrogate 
 the patients nor the other doctors. It was of this 
 variety that Dr. Lapponi said that they would not 
 believe, even if with their own eyes they saw a man 
 rise from the dead. 
 
 To explain the phenomena whose reality they refuse 
 to admit, they invoke various theories—“the faith 
 which cures,” religious suggestion, etc. 
 
 The irreconcilables deny; their mind is made up, 
 but sometimes there is evident bad faith. In their 
 animosity the most inadequate explanations are put 
 forward to escape the supernatural. They go so far 
 as to have recourse to insinuations and absurd accusa¬ 
 tions, not hesitating to say that Lourdes absolutely 
 rests on error, for Bernadette was hallucinated; it is 
 simply a challenge made by error and commercialism 
 to reason. “ Lourdes will pass, and we shall see its 
 ephemeral glory fade this century. This would 
 already have happened, if the interests of the hotels 
 had not been at stake.” 1 
 
 These obstinate adversaries of the supernatural are, 
 however, sometimes very embarrassed when they are 
 put in presence of facts which are impossible to deny. 
 In this case, they commence by refusing all discus¬ 
 sion, and if pushed into their last trenches, they 
 employ arguments which are devoid of any scientific 
 worth. 
 
 At one of the examinations in the Bureau, I had 
 asked two colleagues to examine a patient suddenly 
 
 1 Dr. Bon jour, cite par le Docteur J. Cement, A propos de 
 Lourdes. Imprimerie St Paul, Fribourg. 
 
 9 
 
130 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 cured of Pott’s disease. Their conclusion was that it 
 was absolutely impossible to explain naturally the 
 complete disappearance of the objective and subjec¬ 
 tive symptoms detailed in the recent certificate of the 
 doctor who had charge of the case. This certificate 
 was most precise: it affirmed the existence of cervico- 
 dorsal disease, described the symptoms, and cited in 
 support the name and opinion of a well-known 
 specialist. This very detailed certificate also ex¬ 
 pressly noted that there were no signs of hysteria 
 about the patient, so a nervous origin of the malady 
 could not be believed. 
 
 Following the usual course of procedure, I asked 
 the assembled doctors if they had any observations 
 or objections to make. One of them replied : he laid 
 stress on the sudden disappearance of the pain, the 
 normal muscular movement, the absence of atrophy 
 of the muscles after such a prolonged immobilisation 
 in plaster; keeping silence, however, about the abscess 
 which had formed anteriorly, he maintained that the 
 phenomena were now absolutely contrary to what one 
 would expect. Consequently one had a right to call 
 in question both the diagnosis made by the doctor 
 treating the case, and also the specialist who had 
 advised the immobilising apparatus. These doctors 
 must have been in error. One of them must have made 
 an imperfect examination; the other, the specialist on 
 account of his speciality, saw reason everywhere for 
 immobilisation ! 
 
 I remarked that there was nothing, absolutely 
 nothing, to make us doubt the good faith and com¬ 
 petence of our colleagues, adding that a suspicion of 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 131 
 
 this sort was in complete contradiction with the rules 
 of scientific discussion, and I suggested that it would 
 be at least just to present these objections to the 
 doctors who had charge of the case. All was to no 
 purpose; the only reply was: “It is impossible. 
 True Pott’s disease can never be cured like that'' 
 
 In some cases, not content with denying the cure, 
 they deny the illness. The disease had been cured 
 for a long time, was cured when the patient came to 
 Lourdes. The fact is that the whole affair is a 
 comedy, in which the various scenes have been 
 arranged in advance! The person supposed to be 
 cured has been paid to play a part! We are, then, 
 asked to believe that in spite of the most definite cer¬ 
 tificates, in spite of numerous witnesses absolutely 
 worthy of credence, there is nothing after all but fraud 
 and trumpery ! 
 
 Personally, I did not know that one might simulate 
 optic atrophy; vertebral caries, with an abscess dis¬ 
 charging sequestra; a congenital dislocation of the 
 hip; or a carcinoma. Our archives contain definite 
 examples of cure of all of these. 
 
 Even if some are not so outspoken, yet they put 
 forward an astonishing collection of insinuations. 
 The patient in question was perhaps not really ill. 
 Without doubt the malady was not correctly 
 described. The cure could not really have taken 
 place. Again : those examining cannot have pushed 
 their investigations far enough. They might have 
 been deceived. Their religious belief made them bad 
 judges. The doctors of Lourdes should be held sus¬ 
 pect, their statements cannot be impartial. Their 
 
132 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 professional conscience is too readily inclined to see 
 and admit the supernatural. 
 
 What is to be said for such methods of discussion ? 
 How can we qualify such arguments, when for the 
 most part they are brought forward by those who 
 refuse to study the question ? 
 
 In every discussion on some theoretical question the 
 sincerity of one’s opponent ought to be admitted, 
 even when the theory he advances is considered to be 
 erroneous. We recognise the good faith of those who 
 seek to find a natural explanation for what we con¬ 
 sider supernatural. But we cannot allow them to 
 support their theories in the manner of Zola, making 
 a person die who is in good health, or declaring that 
 someone is mad when he is quite sane. Neither 
 can we allow the accusation of ignorance, which is so 
 constantly made by unbelievers against us, to pass 
 without protest, although we are thankful that they 
 do not tax us with weakness of intellect! As a matter 
 of fact, it is always in the name of Science or Reason 
 that religious manifestations and sincere faith are 
 classed as hysterical symptoms. Such people pre¬ 
 tend with Littre “that Religion has its roots in 
 pathology, and that Sanctity is disease.” 
 
 But, God be praised, the number of conscientious 
 doctors who study and analyse the facts, and who do 
 not believe they have the right to consider those who 
 do not agree with them as hallucinated, increases 
 daily. 
 
 It is often the most cultivated intellects which seem 
 to be struck with a species of blindness when it is a 
 question of religious faith. 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 133 
 
 When the enemies of the supernatural are put in the 
 presence of obvious and extraordinary facts, as they 
 will not acknowledge them, and remain inflexible, 
 they have to distort these facts in some way. Con¬ 
 stantly they will not be satisfied with the proofs 
 offered them, but always demand some more 
 stringent. As a matter of fact, they deny a -priori all 
 evidence, however valid it may be, and will yield 
 only to themselves. 
 
 Human evidence has always constituted the base 
 on which history is built up. If the certitude based 
 on historians worthy of credit is denied, there can be 
 no more teaching. Now, the history of Lourdes is 
 based upon the assertions of hundreds of authorised 
 witnesses; the facts have occurred before their eyes, 
 and a great number of these witnesses are still avail¬ 
 able to reaffirm their assertions. Our cures are facts 
 to be seen, touched, facts patent to the senses. Con¬ 
 sequently, they are as easy to observe as other veri¬ 
 fiable incidents that can be verified, using the pro¬ 
 cedure and methods ordinarily made use of. The 
 basis of all enquiry rests on faith in human testimony. 
 
 It is possible to believe without having seen per¬ 
 sonally, and one has a duty to accept witness which 
 offers sufficient guarantees for credibility. If that is 
 not done, one may doubt all truth, and all but per¬ 
 sonal experience. How is it, then, that the mass of 
 evidence that we can put at the disposal of our scep¬ 
 tical colleagues does not excite their interest ? The 
 reason really is because there are many doctors who 
 do not wish to open their eyes to the light. They 
 prefer not to see themselves, for it is possible to doubt 
 
134 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 the assertions of others, but much more difficult to 
 deny the testimony of one’s own sight and hearing. 
 
 These doctors who deny everything will have none 
 but professional evidence. But, surely, “it is not 
 necessary to be a tailor to see a hole in a garment,” 
 nor to be a watchmaker to know when a clock has 
 stopped ? There are numbers of cases in which non¬ 
 professional evidence is beyond all cavil. The 
 stating of a fact is within the capacity of everybody, 
 and evidence can be given by any eyewitness. In 
 every medical report great importance is attached to 
 the history. This is furnished by the patient him¬ 
 self, by neighbours, by friends, by those who have 
 had charge of him. All doctors who have to form an 
 opinion on some case, have largely to use non-medical 
 evidence when it is a case of enquiring into facts 
 which they have not seen for themselves. 
 
 As to medical testimony, which the incredulous also 
 deny, it is not loyal to put in doubt the diagnosis and 
 observation of some colleague, nor to despise his 
 opinion, before definite study of the case has been 
 made. Admitting that at the Medical Bureau we 
 should not be content with evidence brought forward 
 solely by those interested in the case, and by vague 
 and imperfect certificates, yet we have not the right 
 to dismiss the evidence made by the doctor treating 
 the case, who has had charge of the invalid for months 
 or years, and observed attentively all the phases of 
 the illness. 
 
 We see at Lourdes many unbelieving doctors. 
 Usually they deny in a tone which admits of no 
 reply: “I deny . . . consequently the fact does not 
 

MLLE. CLAIRE PAQUIGNON OF PARIS AT THE BUREAU DES CONSTATATIONS, AUGUST 22 , 1913. 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 135 
 
 exist, since it is I who deny.” What right have they 
 for this rash confidence in their own knowledge ? 
 There is no necessity to have been practising medi¬ 
 cine for a considerable time to know that a wound 
 does not cicatrise instantly; that a dead or dying 
 person does not return immediately to life; that 
 Science has never yet suddenly restored sight to the 
 blind. But, as I have said, many incredulous doctors 
 come to Lourdes with the firm belief that “ a miracle 
 is impossible,” and nothing can make them forsake 
 this belief. 
 
 VII 
 
 Another category of doctors visiting the Bureau 
 arrive not only with the determination not to be con¬ 
 vinced, but they flee from the light. They are dazzled 
 by the evidence, but they kick against expressing the 
 truth. They pretend to seek for light, whilst all the 
 time they are voluntarily keeping in the shade. They 
 tremble at being forced to accept a miracle, which 
 after all may be possible. They do not wish to 
 examine thoroughly; they stop in the middle of the 
 road, pretend to search, but after having said, ” Who 
 knows?” they add, “I do not see.” They have 
 neither the strength of character nor the courage to 
 concentrate their mind on what is put before them. 
 Then they wish to appear indifferent, disinterested, 
 although in reality they are deeply impressed. They 
 prefer to talk of something else, hoping in this manner 
 to rid themselves of hesitation and doubt by forget¬ 
 fulness and indifference. “After all, this question 
 is not worth so much trouble,” they declare as they 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 136 
 
 quit the Bureau, confused at not knowing and not 
 being able to come to a decision. 
 
 Human nature is, however, definitely drawn to 
 make a choice between yes and no, truth and error. 
 It is a real need for our reasoning faculties. Why is 
 it, then, that these doctors go away uncertain and 
 undecided between belief and doubt ? The reason is 
 that a conscientious choice means the acceptance of 
 definite consequences, it implies taking a definite 
 side in the battle; neutrality is very much easier. 
 
 Truth is at times very embarrassing when it com¬ 
 pels us to change our habits. 
 
 VIII 
 
 Some sceptical colleagues, however, arrive at 
 Lourdes with the firm intention of ascertaining for 
 themselves what takes place at the Grotto. They 
 have determined to observe and study the facts 
 loyally, and then to come to a conscientious con¬ 
 clusion. 
 
 Men of this calibre, when they are present at some 
 striking cure, are at first dumbfounded. They do 
 not make that common pleasantry : “ He is cured, so 
 much the better for him ” ; but, after having struggled 
 and protested in the name of Science, they have the 
 necessary courage and candour to recognise that the 
 fact is perfectly obvious and definite. There is cer¬ 
 tain evidence, and they avow that the extraordinary 
 phenomena they have seen cannot be explained by any 
 human science. 
 
 During the National Pilgrimage of 1913, in the 
 
MLLE. CLAIRE PAQUIGNON (AFTER CURE) 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 13 7 
 
 place of honour that is reserved for the doctors imme¬ 
 diately behind the canopy under which the Blessed 
 Sacrament is carried by the Bishop, I saw suddenly, 
 about twenty-five yards away along the rank of 
 stretcher cases, the apparition of a young girl moving 
 out very slowly from amongst the kneeling crowd; 
 her hair all disordered, clad only in her night gar¬ 
 ments, she held her arms crosswise, and big tears 
 rolled down her cheeks as the words, “ My God ! my 
 God !” escaped from her lips. 
 
 This was Mademoiselle Claire Paquignon, of 
 Paris, who had risen from her sick-bed. I had re¬ 
 marked her only that morning at the Grotto, and her 
 almost moribund appearance had excited my pity. 
 
 Soon after I found this young girl at the Medical 
 Bureau; I was present at all the different phases of 
 her examination, took part in them myself, and learnt 
 that Mademoiselle Paquignon had been attacked by 
 tuberculosis four years previously, and had undergone 
 two severe operations, made by Dr. Lerey, surgeon on 
 the staff of St. Joseph’s Hospital. These two inter¬ 
 ventions seemed at first to have some measure of suc¬ 
 cess, but the general state of the patient remained very 
 precarious. One may remove diseased organs, but as 
 yet the operation of removing the peritoneum has not 
 been performed. This membrane was now involved 
 by a very severe form of tuberculosis, against which 
 measures were adopted in vain by Drs. Lesage and 
 Villechauvais, of Paris, from February to August, 
 1913. The main symptoms were continuous fever, 
 great pain, intractable vomiting, and repeated col¬ 
 lections of pus . Dr. Villechauvais declared that 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 138 
 
 to undertake the journey to Lourdes in such a condi¬ 
 tion would mean certain death. 
 
 She departed, however, and I have just recounted 
 how she got up and was radically and suddenly cured 
 at the passage of the Blessed Sacrament. At the 
 Medical Bureau it was recognised that all the 
 abdominal lesions had disappeared absolutely, nor 
 was there sign of tubercle elsewhere. I was present 
 also at the interesting and touching meeting between 
 Claire Paquignon and Dr. Lesage. He arrived at 
 Lourdes on the day following the cure. When he 
 arrived in the presence of the patient, whom he had 
 seen but three days before in an almost dying condi¬ 
 tion, he could not contain his emotion, and, with his 
 eyes full of tears, could only stammer out the two 
 words: “ Oh, Mademoiselle ! ” 
 
 Well, during the examination I found myself in 
 
 close proximity to Dr. C-, of Niort. I could see 
 
 that he had been much astonished and moved at this 
 surprising case, which we had direct evidence of, as 
 also at the details given by Dr. Lesage. Suddenly 
 he turned with a smile to another doctor, a professor 
 of the School of Medicine at Nantes, who had also 
 been present, and made an avowal of his scepticism. 
 The opinion of both was : “ Certainly we are present 
 at an extraordinary event! but it can be transitory 
 only, an amelioration produced by the great desire 
 for a cure combined with an emotional nervous shock 
 experienced on the Esplanade. The illness will soon 
 recommence; for, humanly speaking, it is absolutely 
 impossible to cure such a condition.” But the disease 
 has not returned. 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 139 
 
 Dr. C- became more and more interested; he 
 
 visited the Bureau each of the four following days, 
 returning night and morning to find each time mani¬ 
 fest progress, which augmented daily. He was present 
 at the rapid return to health, appetite, strength, 
 colour, and he saw the young girl leave on the fourth 
 day with all the appearance of advanced con¬ 
 valescence. 
 
 Our colleague, loyal though sceptical, was con¬ 
 vinced of his error. He frankly acknowledged it. 
 Giving his impressions to a journal —La Revue de 
 VOuest —he terminated his article as follows : 
 
 “The fact is there, inexplicable but real. There 
 are no means of escaping from it by talking of nervous 
 phenomena! Mademoiselle Paquignon arrived at 
 Lourdes by the White Train on August 21, suffering 
 from tuberculous peritonitis in its last stages. She 
 left Lourdes on August 25 with all the appearances of 
 a rapid and complete cure. I saw her myself, and 
 there is no denying the fact. 
 
 “ I shall correspond with my colleague in Paris who 
 had medical charge of Mademoiselle Paquignon. If 
 the illness returns I shall announce the fact.” 
 
 I may add that the illness has not returned, at 
 any rate for nine years. I often see Mademoiselle 
 Paquignon. She is a young, healthy-looking, fresh- 
 complexioned girl, full of energy. 
 
 IX 
 
 There are some unbelieving doctors who are less 
 prompt to accept the supernatural, and have many 
 
Ho THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 difficulties to overcome before they avow themselves 
 convinced. . 
 
 To begin with, they usually do not give much 
 attention to the enquiries of the Medical Bureau. 
 They commence by listening somewhat distractedly to 
 what is told them. It is not long, however, before 
 they begin to be somewhat astonished on seeing the 
 cures which have been obtained in organic diseases 
 and not amongst hysterical cases. Their interest is 
 aroused and gradually increases. They scrutinise 
 more closely, thinking that certainly they are in the 
 presence of something in the way of trickery or con¬ 
 juring. Then they finish by realising that their senses 
 are not deceiving them, that all takes place openly at 
 Lourdes in the great clinic of the supernatural. 
 They recognise now, in spite of themselves, that facts 
 do occur which are in opposition to the laws of Nature; 
 that these facts—and this is a great point with them— 
 are examined and controlled in their presence by other 
 medical men, often atheists and as sceptical as them¬ 
 selves. Finally, as it is necessary either to deny and 
 give evidence of the most marked disloyalty, or to 
 admit the supernatural, they range themselves on the 
 side of evidence and truth. 
 
 One morning a capable young doctor presented 
 himself at the Bureau. When asked for his card, he 
 stood rather on his dignity and replied : “ It is not 
 worth the trouble, for I do not believe all these tales.” 
 No insistence was made, little attention was paid to 
 him, and he remained in a corner somewhat isolated. 
 He was present at the arrival of several people who 
 said that they were better or cured, and he saw the 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 141 
 
 doctors present give their opinions, interrogate the 
 patient, strictly analyse the facts, and sum up as they 
 seemed to indicate. 
 
 Old * ‘ miracules 5 ’ came in, recounted their case, 
 and claimed to be noted again. He laughed at the 
 recital of some of these privileged people, scarcely 
 believing that the individual there so smiling and gay 
 was once a case abandoned by Science; but he could 
 find the report, examine all its pathological details, 
 witnesses, facts, etc.—all were to be found there! 
 Then more or less unconsciously he began to interest 
 himself in “these tales.” After a time he went out 
 quietly, but deep in thought. The afternoon of that 
 same day, he again entered the Bureau, but this time 
 card in hand, and addressing the Secretary, said : 
 “Colleague, I am an imbecile; please do me the 
 honour to take my card.” 
 
 From that day the doctor in question has rarely 
 passed a year without coming to take part in our 
 work, and has become one of our most faithful and 
 assiduous helpers. 
 
 X 
 
 Finally there are unbelieving members of the pro¬ 
 fession who are absolutely “bowled over” by the 
 evidence of some fact outside the laws of Nature that 
 they have witnessed, and they surrender without 
 resistance. The veil which obscured their sight seems, 
 as it were, to be torn away by the force of the truth, 
 and a light which is sudden and dazzling streams in 
 upon them. 
 
 During one of the recent big pilgrimages, one of our 
 
142 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 colleagues, who comes each year to give us his help 
 and assistance, encountered on the Rosary Esplanade 
 a fellow-student whom he had not seen for several 
 years. Very pleased with this encounter, he asked 
 his friend to accompany him to the Bureau, but he 
 soon perceived that the latter, an absolute sceptic, 
 was not at all disposed to take the Bureau seriously. 
 At the definite invitation which was addressed to him, 
 he replied in a railing tone: “ What do you wish me 
 to do there ? I know exactly what occurs. I should 
 see three or four doctors . . . somewhat behind the 
 times . . . pontificate, and register pretended cures 
 of hysterical women. That sort of thing does not 
 interest me one little bit. * * 
 
 After having explained how things were conducted 
 at the Bureau, and having tried to convince him with¬ 
 out success that the examinations at this clinic were 
 serious and very interesting, by quoting finally some 
 definite cases, he managed to persuade his friend to 
 enter the room reserved for the doctors. 
 
 There he was surprised to find about twenty 
 doctors, who seemed to him by no means “ behind the 
 times ”—on the contrary, very much up to date—who 
 mutually gave their impressions and opinions of 
 various cases, and pulled diagnoses to pieces. 
 
 The boredom that he had hidden on entering with 
 a somewhat sarcastic smile soon gave place to a cer¬ 
 tain confidence. He saw around him doctors of all 
 kinds of opinions, even freethinkers and Protestants, 
 who came and went in an atmosphere that was quite 
 scientific. Certainly he had not been introduced into 
 a sacristy , as he had rather feared. Affairs passed 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 143 
 
 normally and straightforwardly, and one found one¬ 
 self quite at ease in a sympathetic atmosphere. The 
 doctors attached to the Bureau neither tried to 
 influence their colleagues nor to impose upon them 
 their own opinions. They did not even speak of the 
 miraculous. Could it be, after all, that his friend 
 was right ? 
 
 Just at this moment, however, a young girl was 
 brought to the Bureau, who had got up from her 
 stretcher in front of the Grotto, and who said that 
 she was suddenly cured of vertebral caries with com¬ 
 plete paraplegia; her report contained a very detailed 
 account, together with the certificate of a well-known 
 professor of the Faculty of Paris, under whose treat¬ 
 ment she had been in hospital for two years. 
 
 The diagnosis made by such a well-known man pro¬ 
 duced considerable impression on the assembly, for it 
 could not be called in doubt. The reality of the cure, 
 as complete as it was sudden, could not be denied. 
 The interrogation of the patient, examination of the 
 certificates, witnesses, etc., all took place before the 
 assembled doctors. The examination of the patient, 
 undertaken by five doctors, lasted more than an hour. 
 Then, according to the usual mode of procedure, the 
 report which had been drawn up by the examining 
 doctors was read out at the assembly. At the ques¬ 
 tion, “ Can the sudden and absolute cure be attributed 
 to a natural process ?” all the doctors present, includ¬ 
 ing the incredulous practitioner, answered in the 
 negative. 
 
 When the meeting was over, the sarcastic smile with 
 which the sceptic had accepted the invitation to 
 
144 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 examine for himself had given place to interest and 
 emotion. To the questions of his friend on his first 
 impressions, he replied: “There is no doubt. God 
 alone could act so rapidly.” At the door of the 
 Bureau he said : “I was delighted with what I saw; 
 I would not have given up my place for an empire.” 
 
 Soon after he announced to his wife his intention of 
 staying a little longer at Lourdes, in order to con¬ 
 tinue his collaboration in the interesting work of the 
 Medical Bureau. 
 
 XI 
 
 Medical men of various religious beliefs—Protes¬ 
 tants, Jews, etc.—are not exempt from the attraction 
 which draws so many to Lourdes. Every year our 
 register gives the names of doctors not belonging to 
 the Catholic Faith, and they take not a little interest 
 in the proceedings of the Bureau. 
 
 But all doctors do not come solely with the view of 
 studying the cases. A large number exist who come 
 to Lourdes as pilgrims. They are led there, it may 
 be, to return thanks to our Lady for graces received, 
 or to demand a cure for themselves or for some mem¬ 
 ber of their family. A colleague in New York, intro¬ 
 ducing his young son to Dr. Boissarie at Lourdes, 
 sent with him the following lines written by himself, 
 lines somewhat surprising to come from the pen of a 
 doctor: “ My son, in the state of weakness in which 
 he is now, joined to the uncertainty as to his future, 
 turns for help to our Lady of Lourdes. The super¬ 
 natural is there—the supernatural which can cure him 
 and restore him to health. The pilgrimage he is 
 
THE DOCTORS 
 
 145 
 
 undertaking will show him to be submissive to God’s 
 will, and seeking in all things his glory. He believes, 
 we believe. Mary immaculate, pray for us, who have 
 recourse to thee.” Signed: Dr. Archambault- 
 Lassalhe. 1 
 
 Another doctor, whose child was blind, wrote to 
 the President of the Bureau : “ I have come twice this 
 winter from Ireland. I shall return a third time, for 
 Lourdes only can cure my child.” 
 
 Again, another example: “ I have nothing to 
 expect from medicine. ... I come to ask my cure 
 from the blessed Virgin; and if I do not obtain it, 
 resignation and submission to the will of God.” 
 
 In recent years I have often seen medical men with¬ 
 out any ostentation come on a pilgrimage of thanks¬ 
 giving, and speak with grateful hearts of their grati¬ 
 tude and veneration for our Lady of Lourdes. 
 
 1 Boissarie, L’CEuvre de Lourdes , p. 38. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 CONCLUSIONS 
 
 P ERHAPS from what I have said the conclusion 
 may be drawn that even the most exacting may 
 find that Lourdes offers the medical profession a sub¬ 
 ject for study, a clinic of great interest, and to all, 
 motives for venerating God, the all-powerful Creator. 
 
 My design will have been attained if I have induced 
 some to study the question more thoroughly, and to 
 turn their minds to these truths, which so far are 
 insufficiently known. I shall be well satisfied if I 
 have succeeded in arousing in the souls of some indif¬ 
 ferent or sceptical members of the profession the desire 
 to investigate more thoroughly a problem which 
 places us in the presence of the supernatural. 
 
 To people of good-will, and those who vaguely 
 know that surprising things do occur, I say : Come to 
 Lourdes; enquire, examine, see all the imposing mani¬ 
 festations of charity, which frequently touch the most 
 hardened. You will find in the vicinity of the 
 Grotto everything capable of satisfying a legitimate 
 curiosity. You will learn things, perhaps until now 
 unsuspected, which will open your eyes and conduct 
 you infallibly to Catholic belief. If you suffer in 
 body, you will be perhaps cured or relieved. If it is 
 your soul that is diseased in some respect, you will 
 always find the divine Healer. 
 
 To my colleagues who are loyal and sincere in 
 their search for truth, I address myself with confidence 
 
 146 
 
CONCLUSIONS 
 
 147 
 
 and say: In the place of feigning ignorance as to 
 the extraordinary marvels that undoubtedly do occur 
 at Lourdes, instead of treating them with derision or 
 denying them . . . from a distance , would it not be 
 much more reasonable, interesting, and logical to 
 adopt the same attitude that you do with regard to 
 your scientific studies ? Is it not preferable to go and 
 study on the spot , to investigate in the Bureau itself, 
 the questions that we put openly and straightfor¬ 
 wardly before all the doctors present ? 
 
 Come to Lourdes during the time of the great pil¬ 
 grimages. Come then to the Medical Bureau. You 
 will find yourself absolutely at home. You will 
 receive the fraternal welcome which is given to all; 
 will encounter many other practitioners, sincere and 
 loyal in their intentions. You will be cordially 
 invited to take part in this interesting work; will par¬ 
 ticipate in the examinations and enquiries, where all 
 possible objections are brought forward and openly 
 discussed. 
 
 I cannot promise that you will see an exceptional 
 case, for the cures do not take place according to our 
 wish or desire. You can, however, pick out from our 
 archives the particular case you would like to enquire 
 about, and continue your researches as far and for 
 as long as you like. 
 
 Supposing that you consider that our examinations 
 are insufficient, that our methods leave something to 
 be desired, that you think such and such a system of 
 investigation should be employed—then tell us so, 
 nobody will make difficulties or objections. 
 
 If God should permit that you are present at the 
 
THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 148 
 
 Bureau at some cure which is absolutely inexplicable 
 (and you stand every chance of encountering such), 
 then I ask that you will not shut your eyes to the light. 
 
 In every case I believe that all will have the intimate 
 conviction that everything passes openly and 
 honestly, that all the enquiries are conducted 
 systematically and with the greatest care. 
 
 I have also complete confidence that after having 
 come in contact with the supernatural, you will leave 
 Lourdes with the belief that the facts there are worthy 
 the attention of every cultivated man of good faith, 
 and that the supreme object of the Bureau tends to 
 one sole end : 
 
 Search for the Truth, and through the knowledge 
 of the Truth, the spread of greater honour and devo¬ 
 tion to the Immaculate Virgin. 
 
 Paris, February 11, 1922. 
 
INDEX 
 
 A 
 
 Agnes, Sister (oi the Little 
 Sisters of the Assumption), cure 
 of, 47 
 
 Ambrose, Sister, cure of, 22 
 Archambault-Lassalhe, Dr., 145 
 Augier, Dr., 58 
 Authier, Madame, cure of, 47 
 
 B 
 
 Babinsky, 55 
 
 Bailly, Marie, cure ot, in 
 Bathing at the Piscines, 98 
 Bee, Dr., 54 
 
 Benedict XIV, Pope, on miracles, 
 
 4i 
 
 Bernadette, 1 
 
 medical opinion about, 9, 10 
 Bernheim, on cures of Lourdes, 
 
 ll» 85 
 
 limits of suggestion, 5 <5 
 Bertillon, Dr., 86 
 Besnier, Dr., 107 
 Bire, Madame, cure of, 22 
 Boissarie, Dr., 15, 73, 82, 107, 
 no, 120, 128 
 Borel, Marie, cure of, 22 
 
 C 
 
 C-, Dr., of Niort, 138 
 
 Cailleux, Mdlle. Emilie, cure of, 
 
 114 
 
 Cancer, three cases of, 22 
 
 Carel, Dr., no 
 
 Castel, Dr. du, 108 
 
 Charcot, 55, 102 
 
 Chauvet, Marguerite, cure of, 41 
 
 Clement, Rene, cure of, 22 
 
 Conversions, 12 
 
 Cot, Dr., 51 
 Coulange, Dr., 35, 114 
 Couteau, Sophie, cure of, 47 
 Cox, Dr., 74 
 
 Criticisms on the Medical Bureau, 
 89 
 
 Cures, cold water, etc., 8 
 different kinds of, 7, 22 
 miraculous or supernatural, 
 what is understood by, 17 
 outside natural forces, 66 
 which are not miracles, 67 
 which are not reported at the 
 Bureau, 88 
 
 D 
 
 Dehant, Joachim, cure of, 22 
 Diday, 102 
 
 Doctors, ignorance about Lourdes, 
 127 
 
 scepticism Oi, 128, 139 
 Dozous, Dr., 9 
 Dubedat, Dr., 35 
 Duret, Professor, 85 
 
 E 
 
 Ernst, Dr., 107 
 Eynard, Dr., 54 
 
 F 
 
 Faith and Science, 7 2 
 Fenestre, Dr., 33 
 Fistula, stercoral, cure of, 22 
 Foret, Juliette, cure of, 15 
 Fournier, Professor, 107 
 Fractures of long standing, cure 
 of, 22 
 
 Frontal sinus, cure of, 22 
 Fur, Dr. Le, 90 
 
 149 
 
150 
 
 THE FACTS OF LOURDES 
 
 G 
 
 Gargam, Gabriel, cure of, 42 
 Gony, Dr., 114 
 Goret, Dr., 114 
 
 Gougaud, Mdlle. Valentine, cure 
 
 of, 57 
 
 Gouillard, Dr., ill 
 Grandmaison de Bruno, Dr. de, 
 3 2 
 
 Grivotte, La, 19, 47 
 Guerin, Dr., 30 
 
 Guillotteau, Mdlle. Ernestine, 
 cure of, 43 
 
 H 
 
 Hip disease, 41 
 Huprelle, Aurelie, cure of, 22 
 Hysterical patients and miiacles, 
 42 
 
 J 
 
 Jourdain, Dr., 54 
 L 
 
 Lapponi, Dr., 129 
 Laurence, Monsignor, 10 
 Lebacq, Henri, cure of, 22 
 Lebranchu, Marie, cure of, 19 
 Le Bee, Dr., 74 
 Lecene, Professor, 116 
 Lemarchand, Marie, cure of, 47 
 Lerey, Dr., 137 
 Lesage, Dr., 137 
 Leveque, Leonie, cure of, 22 
 Littre, 11, 132 
 
 Lourdes, The Truth about 
 Lourdes , by Dr. R., 24 
 Lupus, cure of, 106 
 
 M 
 
 Maclou, Dr. S., 73 
 Malingre, Dr., 34 
 Medical Bureau, Archives of the, 
 26, 85 _ 
 
 characteristics of, 79 
 commencement of, 70 
 doctors invited to visit, 
 101, 147 
 
 doctors of various reli¬ 
 gions visit, 144 
 
 Medical Bureau, number of doctors 
 visiting, 103 
 privacy of, 81 
 procedure of, 80 
 work of the, 71 
 Medical certificates, 91, 116 
 
 indefiniteness of, 118 
 refused by doctors, 117 
 Michaux, Dr., 43 
 Michelet, Dr., 35 
 Miracles at Lourdes, medical men 
 and, 11, 100, 104 
 occur publicly, 8 
 premature accounts of, 
 90 
 
 Monteux, Dr., 114 
 Mougeot, Dr., 36 
 
 N 
 
 Nancey, Juliette, cure of, 33 
 Nervous maladies, 40 
 Newspapers and Reviews : 
 Journal de la Grotte, 51, 57, 
 90, 91 
 
 La Croix de Paris , 116 
 La Revtie de POuest, 139 
 La Semaine Religieuse , 62 
 Le Petit Marseillais, 113 
 Le Soleil du Midi, 113 
 Science and Life, 112 
 
 O 
 
 Opponents reject evidence, 27 
 Optic nerve, cure of lesion of, 22 
 
 P 
 
 Paquignon, Mdlle. Claire, cure 
 of, 137 
 
 Petitpierre, Dr., 61 
 Philippon, Dr., 112 
 Phthisical cavities, cure or, 22 
 Pilgrimages, private, reports 01 
 cures, 88 
 
 Pilgrims and doctors, 93, 96 
 Pilgrims’ day at Lourdes, 95 
 Pineau, Dr., 114 
 Piroult, Dr., 61 
 
 Pott’s disease, 40, 51, 58, 114, 
 121, 130 
 
INDEX 
 
 I5i 
 
 Pr-, Mdlle., cure of, 46 
 
 Premature accounts of miracles, 
 9i 
 
 Press publishes cures prematurely, 
 6 9 
 
 Pulmonary tuberculosis, cures of, 
 22, 3 °, 33 
 
 R 
 
 Radiographs, 92 
 
 Renan, on the miraculous, 72 
 
 Resignation of the sick, 15 
 
 Richard, Marie, cure of, 22 
 
 Ripaut, Dr., 33 
 
 Roquet, Elise, cure of, 47 
 
 Rouchel, Madame, cure of, 106 
 
 Rouquette, Dr., 35 
 
 Rudder, Pierre De, cure of, 22 
 
 S 
 
 Sacrament, Procession of the 
 Blessed, 8 
 
 Sacrifice of cure by the sick, 15 
 Salin, Mdlle. Irene, cure of, 51 
 Schoepfer, Mgr., 74 
 Science and miracles, 4, 38 
 Sequestra, 17 
 Society of St. Luke, 91 
 
 Dr. Le Bee, Pre¬ 
 sident of, 74 
 
 Suggestion, 48 
 
 T 
 
 Tartanssen, Dr., 54 
 Tennesson, Dr., 108 
 
 Thurel, Louis, cure of, 30 
 Travaillard, Madame, cure of, 22 
 Tubercular peritonitis, cure of, 
 137 
 
 Tumours disappear in the piscine, 
 22 
 
 Turo, Dr., 35 
 
 U 
 
 Ulcer from knee to ankle, cure of, 
 22 
 
 Universities and the miracles of 
 Lourdes, 109 
 
 Unknown forces of Nature, 64 
 V 
 
 j Verges, Dr., President of Medical 
 Commission, 1858, 10 
 Verzier, Marguerite, cure of, 22 
 Villechauvais, Dr., 137 
 
 W 
 
 Water at the Grotto, 8 
 
 and suggestion, 50 
 
 Weil, Dr., 34 
 
 Witnesses, evidence of, 23, 133 
 Wounds cicatrise in a second, 22 
 
 X 
 
 X., Monsieur, and his family, 15 
 Z 
 
 Zola on cures at Lourdes, 19, 47, 
 132 
 
I 
 
 BT 653 * M27m 
 
 H a r c h a n d ? AI f r 0 d * 
 
 The facts 
 MedieaI 
 
 of Lourdes and the 
 Bureau / 
 
 Bapst Library 
 
 Boston College 
 Chestnut Hilt Mass. 02167