You’ve just wrapped up another online order—maybe a few, given the holiday rush. A little while later, something new appears in your inbox: an email from Amazon asking you to verify information related to a recent purchase.

It looks routine. The timing makes sense. You’re already waiting on packages, so you follow the link, sign in, and update the requested details.

Nothing seems unusual.

A few hours pass.

Then you notice unexpected charges in your bank account—transactions you didn’t make. You retrace your steps. Everything you did seemed normal. So where did things go wrong?

This is the position thousands of people have found themselves in this month.

Amazon’s 48-Hour Warning

As holiday shopping ramps up, Amazon issued a 48-hour advisory warning users about a surge in fraudulent emails designed to look identical to legitimate account notices. According to the company, scammers are targeting customers with messages about “order problems,” “payment verification,” and “suspicious activity,” all engineered to redirect users to convincing fake login pages.

These messages typically appear right after actual purchases, making them harder to question. The goal is simple: capture login credentials or payment information while the user thinks they’re dealing with a routine account issue.

This timing is what makes these attempts so effective—and why Amazon pushed the alert out quickly.

How Phishing Emails Slip In Unnoticed

Most people assume phishing emails are easy to spot. Many are. But the most successful ones aren’t the obvious, typo-filled impersonations.

They work because they blend seamlessly with what the user is already doing. If you’re shopping heavily, expecting shipments, or updating payment details, an email requesting verification feels like part of the normal workflow. And because the website linked in the message looks familiar enough, the trap works before you realize anything is off.

It isn’t a mistake—these emails appear exactly when you’re checking orders, so it’s easy to respond without thinking twice.

Knowing how these emails operate is the first step toward recognizing the warning signs.

What Separates a Phishing Email From the Real Thing

To keep your inbox (and your bank account) safe, here are the specific checks that make a difference:

1. Inspect the Sender Address
   Scammers often imitate Amazon by using addresses with extra characters or slightly altered domains.
   Example formats to avoid:

   • amazon-support.com

   • account-update-amzn.net

   • @amazon.verify.info

   Amazon emails come from @amazon.com—not variations of it.

2. Avoid Clicking Links Directly
   Even a realistic-looking link can direct you to a fabricated login page.
   Safer approach:
   Open a new browser window → type in amazon.com manually → check your account from there.

3. Don’t Provide Payment Information or Open Attachments from an Email
   Amazon will never ask you to “update your card immediately” via an email link.
   Legitimate Amazon account emails don’t include attachments. If you see one, delete the message.

4. Enable Two-Step Verification (2FA)
   If someone does get your password, this step can prevent them from logging in.

Why These Attacks Keep Working

Despite awareness campaigns, these scams continue because they exploit normal routines:

• People are busy

• The emails arrive when you’re already expecting order updates

• The login pages look extremely close to the real thing

Everything seems normal—until unexpected charges appear in your account. Recognizing this pattern is the most reliable safeguard.

Final Thoughts

The people who fall for these attacks aren’t foolish. They’re doing what anyone would do: checking on their orders, updating information, and trying to keep deliveries on track.

A little friction—checking the sender, opening a browser manually, confirming alerts within your account dashboard—goes a long way toward keeping your information secure. By paying attention to timing, sender details, and your own account dashboard, you can stay one step ahead of these common attacks.

This blog is fully reader-funded. If you value careful analysis over clickbait, your support keeps this work independent.

This blog is fully reader-funded. If you value careful analysis over clickbait, your support keeps this work independent.

Give a gift subscription

Have you received an email like this before? Share your experience in the comments — your story might help someone else avoid the same mistake.

Leave a comment

Padre Pio is remembered as a saint, mystic, and miracle-worker—but how much of what is said about him can withstand scrutiny? In a previous article, we examined evidence suggesting that Padre Pio’s stigmata were likely anything but divine in origin. That does not, however, automatically rule out other claims considered miraculous.

In this post, we examine claims either made by Padre Pio himself or attributed to him, during his life and after his death.

Like investigations grounded in evidence? Subscribe to Examine Everything for new analysis straight to your inbox.

Subscribe now

Knowing Sins (“Soul Reading”)

During his life, Padre Pio was reputed to know the sins of those he encountered, particularly during confession. Many purported psychics rely on techniques such as Barnum statements—general observations that seem personal but apply to most people—or cold reading, which uses subtle reactions to refine statements and appear accurate. In contrast, Pio may not have needed such techniques: Pio may not have needed such techniques: over repeated confessions, he may have come to understand the tendencies and struggles of individuals, creating the appearance of knowing sins without invoking anything miraculous. What seemed like supernatural knowledge could easily have come from keen observation, memory, and pastoral familiarity.

However, he himself apparently never claimed to possess such an ability. According to his personal secretary, Father John Aurilia, OFM Cap., in a phone interview on the Reason and Theology podcast, Pio did not claim this ability

“When I was a young priest and assigned to San Giovanni Rotondo, I went to confession there. I went to [Pip's] room and said, ‘Father, I want to make a confession.’ And he said, ‘Yeah, kneel down.’ You know, he immediately noticed and said, ‘Why are you shaking?’ I said, ‘I heard that you know the sins of people.’ And he starts laughing and says, ‘That’s what people say about me? I don’t even know my own sins. How can I know the sins of the people?’”

This suggests that many of the rumors about his supposed “soul reading” originated with parishioners or devotees rather than Pio himself. Since he explicitly denied having this ability, these stories should be treated as devotional exaggeration rather than verified phenomena.

Bilocation

Whether it’s apparent knowledge of sins or being in two places at once, examining these claims starts with understanding what was actually observed—and what was assumed. Padre Pio was reputed to bilocate—appear in two places simultaneously (distinct from omnipresence, which is being everywhere at once).

Because so much of the lore surrounding Pio blends eyewitness testimony with hearsay, it is important to clarify which accounts are firsthand and which are secondhand. Father John Aurilia is especially useful for this distinction, not because his testimony is extraordinary, but because he was both a long-time associate of Pio and unusually candid about what he actually saw versus what he merely heard.

Aurilia explained this clearly in a 2013 interview with Arleen Spenceley:

“Yes, I saw the stigmata many times, when he did not have on the half-gloves. I never experienced bilocation and other miracles, but I do know they are true because the people who were affected by it told me first hand.”

Aurilia noted that he had seen Pio’s stigmata many times (for more on this, see Examine Padre Pio Part 2), but he never witnessed bilocation or other miracles personally. He also recounted stories told to him by others—stories he accepted as true despite having no direct experience of them. One example involved someone claiming Pio appeared in the court of Palia at three o’clock in the afternoon, even though Aurilia personally saw Pio hearing confessions at that exact time:

“I would say, ‘You’ve got to be kidding! Three o’clock in the afternoon Padre Pio was sitting confessions in the church!’ But the person says, ‘Here is the picture.’ Padre Pio is writing in the court of Palia, you know, to defend somebody or serve as witness… so he had bilocation, definitely.”

The photograph Aurilia refers to was never produced publicly, and even if one had existed, the photographic technology of the era likely would make it difficult to confirm that the figure was truly Pio unless it were a clear close-up. Alternate explanations include a different friar resembling him, mislabeling of the date or time, or anecdotal exaggeration over repeated retellings. As historian Sergio Luzzatto observes, stories about Pio’s miracles often grew in detail over time, shaped more by later devotion than by contemporary evidence.

Padre Pio once stated:

“I don’t know how it is or the nature of this phenomenon—and I certainly don’t give it much thought—but it did happen to me to be in the presence of this or that person, to be in this or that place; I do not know whether my mind was transported there, or what I saw was some sort of representation of the place or the person; I do not know whether I was there with my body or without it.”

Unlike the supposed ability to know the sins of others, bilocation appears to have been something Pio himself allegedly experienced, albeit without understanding or controlling it.

The Testimony of Padre Carmelo Durante

Padre Carmelo Durante, a confrere of Pio, offers insight into how expectation shaped devotees’ experiences. He recalled occasions when others told him that Pio was always present at meetings or journeys, sometimes without the participants realizing it:

“‘Padre, Rosinella said that you are always present at our meetings!’ And quite untroubled he answered, ‘Well? […] Don’t you want me to come to these meetings?’”

Durante observed that Pio often accompanied individuals in subtle ways, sometimes leaving them uncertain if he had been physically present or only symbolically so. Experiences like these show how awareness of Pio’s reputation and the expectation of his presence could influence perceptions—much like the way people interpret seemingly paranormal events in ghost hunting.

Taken together, these testimonies suggest that social expectation and reverence played a major role in shaping perceptions of Pio’s “presence.”

Found this analysis useful? Share it with others who value evidence-based exploration.

Share

Healings (Lifetime, Posthumous, and Proxy)

Healings (Lifetime, Posthumous, and Proxy)

Accounts of healings attributed to Padre Pio occurred both during his lifetime and after his death, whether in his presence, through prayer, or via items associated with him. Posthumously, devotees continued to report healings connected to relics or devotional objects.

Independent medical verification of these claims is limited. While some were recognized by the Catholic Church during canonization, most lack corroboration. Reported improvements may have been temporary or shaped by expectation. Research on placebo effects, psychosomatic responses, and expectation-driven improvement suggests that people who pray or hope for healing can experience subjective physiological changes even without a medical cure (see Studies 1–5, particularly Benedetti 2009; Price et al. 2008; Turner et al. 2002).

Padre Pio himself, as recorded by Cardinal Seán O’Malley, OFM Cap., stated:

“After my death, I will do more. My real mission will begin after my death.”

Such statements help explain why devotees interpreted experiences—smelling roses, feeling comforted, or experiencing health improvements—as evidence of his continuing influence. Psychologically, such statements can prime expectation, making later events feel confirmatory.

Father Giuseppe Rossi, a Capuchin priest and scholar familiar with Pio’s ministry, cautions:

“Of the alleged healings, many are unconfirmed or nonexistent. Without medical confirmation it is difficult to reach a conclusion.”

Across all claims, patterns are consistent: evidence is largely anecdotal, improvement is difficult to verify, and expectation, devotion, and context strongly shaped interpretations. Posthumous claims reflect ongoing devotion and anticipation, aligning with Pio’s own statement. While meaningful to believers, these experiences provide limited evidence of supernatural causation.

What’s your take? Leave a comment below — thoughtful discussion keeps this community sharp.

Leave a comment

Conclusion

Whether involving healings, bilocation, or posthumous intervention, claims about Padre Pio hold deep significance for many. Critical examination shows that most evidence rests on anecdote, expectation, and devotion rather than medically verified events.

This does not diminish their personal or emotional value; it simply highlights how belief, perception, and cultural context can shape extraordinary narratives. Evaluating these stories carefully offers insight into the psychological and cultural forces behind why such claims endure.

This blog is fully reader-funded. If you value careful analysis over clickbait, your support keeps this work independent.

Give a gift subscription

References

Studies on Placebo, Expectation, and Healing

1. Benedetti, Fabrizio. Placebo Effects: Understanding the Mechanisms in Health and Disease. Oxford University Press, 2009.

2. Price, Donald D., et al. “A Comprehensive Review of the Placebo Effect: Recent Advances and Current Thought.” Annual Review of Psychology 59 (2008): 565–590.

3. Turner, Robert A., et al. “The Role of Expectancy in Placebo Analgesia.” Psychosomatic Medicine 64, no. 3 (2002): 331–339.

4. Miller, Franklin G., and Luana Colloca. “The Legitimacy of Placebo Treatments in Clinical Practice.” Journal of Medical Ethics 36, no. 12 (2010): 729–733.

5. Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn, and Peter C. Gøtzsche. “Is the Placebo Powerless? An Analysis of Clinical Trials Comparing Placebo with No Treatment.” New England Journal of Medicine 344, no. 21 (2001): 1594–1602.

Interviews & Testimony

1. Arleen Spenceley. “The Pio Priest.” Tampa Bay Times, 2013. (Interview with Father John Aurilia, OFM Cap.)

2. Reason & Theology Podcast. Interview with Father John Aurilia, OFM Cap., Episode on Padre Pio (phone interview).

3. Padre Carmelo Durante, Through the Eyes of His Contemporaries. Collection of recollections (commonly cited in secondary literature; exact edition may vary).

Church and Canonization Material

1. Vatican Congregation for the Causes of Saints. Decree on the Miracle for the Canonization of Pio of Pietrelcina. 1999.

2. O’Malley, Seán, OFM Cap. Personal reminiscence quoted in various biographical sources (recorded statement of Padre Pio).

Secondary Sources

1. Luzzatto, Sergio. Padre Pio: Miracles and Politics in a Secular Age. Metropolitan Books, 2011.

2. Ruffin, C. Bernard. Padre Pio: The True Story. Our Sunday Visitor Press, 1991.

Each point listed above (as well as others that will be addressed in subsequent posts) are topics that deserve their own investigations. We will examine the evidence of each topic on its own merits.

Let us first look at some of the claims and accolades associated with Padre Pio:

Pio (born Francesco Forgione) was an Italian friar turned iconic priest. He is considered a miracle worker who bore the marks of Christ. Despite the clash he had with high ranking church officials—including a pope—he was made a saint.

We will not be looking at his sermons, teachings, or all of the miraculous claims associated with Padre Pio. Instead, we will examine the stigmata that became associated with him. 

What are stigmata? The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines stigmata (the plural of stigma) as “bodily marks or pains resembling the wounds of the crucified Jesus and sometimes accompanying religious ecstasy.”

In 1971, three years after Padre Pio's death, Pope Paul VI speaking of Pio stated, "it is not easy to say it.... (Pio) bore the wounds of our Lord. He was a man of prayer and suffering." *

In 1910, the year Pio was ordained as a priest, he had his first personal encounter with stigmata. Unlike the ones he would later be known for, these stigmata were not exactly visible, save for a possible slight reddening. These are known as “invisible stigmata” and are merely felt by the possessor. They are not detectable by any sort of medical or lab equipment. He later wrote about this event:

“Then last night something happened which I can neither explain nor understand. In the middle of the palms of my hands, a red mark appeared, about the size of a penny, accompanied by acute pain in the middle of the red marks. The pain was more pronounced in the middle of the left hand, so much so that I can still feel it. Also under my feet, I can feel some pain.”

Only a year prior to this, a book by Father Germano Ruoppolo was published: Letters and Ecstasies of the Servant of God, Gemma Galgani. It was the second book written by Father Ruoppolo regarding Miss Galgani, a mystic who was later beatified (the step before sainthood in the Catholic faith). Prior to Pio, Galgani bore the stigmatic scars of Christ.

Miss Galgani was a contemporary of Pio. She was about nine years older and lived in Northern Italy, whereas Pio lived in the South. 

As a member of the clergy, raised in a devout Roman Catholic family and culture, Padre Pio would have known of Miss Galgani, her stories and her stigmata.

In fact, in a letter from Padre Pio to Padre Benedict written on May 2, 1912, it is clear that he knows of her and the books about her, writing, “... Moreover I am asking you for charity: I would like to read the booklet 'Letters and Ecstasies of the Servant of God, Gemma Galgani,' as well as the other one of the same servant of God, ‘The Holy hour.' I am sure that you will agree and meet my desire. Bless me. Padre Pio."

In his book Padre Pio: Miracles and Politics in a Secular Age, the historian Sergio Luzzatto cites a letter from Pio to one of his spiritual directors, Father Agostino:

“We do not know whether Father Agostino, reading these words, realized that Padre Pio had copied them verbatim from a letter by Gemma Galgani. Nor do we know whether he or Father Benedetto were aware that a dozen other letters by Padre Pio, written between September 1911 and May 1913, reproduced word for word—without citing it—items from her ‘Letters and Ecstasies'... but, to confuse matters further, he sought to make them believe that he did not even possess Gemma's book.”

Luzzatto later writes that, "For months, Padre Pio had been copying out sentences from [Letters and Ecstasies and The Holy Hour] and he would continue to do so for another entire year.”

Despite Pio being supposedly unaware of Gemma Galgani, he was well aware of what stigmata were and the attention that came from them. According to an essay based on Giuseppe Caccioppoli's 2013 interview for PadrePio TV, Padre Pio was also familiar with Saint Francis of Assisi (circa 1181-1223), one of the most well known saints to have stigmata. The essay states: On January 6, 1903, Francesco [Pio] left home for Mercone, to begin the novitiate in the Capuchin's Order. His mom gave him a Rosary (still preserved) and said: "My son, Saint Francis has called you, and you must go." 

Other stigmatics include St. Catherine of Siena, St. Faustina Kowalska, St. Rita of Cascia, and Domenico da Cese (who was given the title of "Servant of God" in 2015).  Da Cese was a friend of Padre Pio's and a fellow monk in the Capuchin order (founded by Francis of Assisi).

For this reason alone, it would not seem a foreign notion that someone could possess stigmata, although it might be an odd and rare occasion to witness or experience firsthand.

Skipping ahead to 1918, while listening to confessions, Pio claims to have another experience with stigmata on his body, only this time the wounds were entirely visible and bleeding. News of the stigmata and his other miracles began to spread and in two years the Vatican started imposing sanctions with regards to Pio conducting masses and addressing the public, as well as restricting him from showing his stigmata publicly.

Over the next several years Padre Pio’s stigmata were examined by physicians, doctors, and even clergymen. Several of these examinations were favorable to Pio’s cause, such as Bishop Rossi’s, which concluded that the stigmata were not “the work of the devil” nor were they the result of “deceit, fraud or a malicious or evil ability. Much less were they the result of external suggestion, nor do I consider them to be the result of suggestion.”

Notwithstanding the support of many in the church, The Holy See (the government of the Roman Catholic Church) made statements over the next few years denying that the miracles and stigmata were due to divine cause. Nor were the stigmata submitted to the special Vatican tribunal as evidence for consideration for the canonization of Padre Pio. These last points alone are not grounds for dismissing Pio's stigmata as genuine. The Holy See may have merely been cautious on what they accept and share with the public. Also, the required prerequisite for Pio's canonization may well have been met without considering the stigmata.

Padre Pio’s claims of stigmata are not unique nor did they set a precedent within Roman Catholicism, which had previously canonized stigmatic saints. So it is noteworthy that not all examiners and clergymen were confident in Padre Pio's claims. In fact, two popes in succession doubted the divine claim and authenticity of his stigmata.

One examination, led by Father Agostino Gemelli, on behalf of the Holy Office, did the most "damage" to the credibility of the stigmata in that he pointed out the stigmata's likeness to wounds brought on by purposeful application of a caustic substance. Father Gemelli was a Franciscan friar and a physician, who founded the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (Catholic University of the Sacred Heart) of Milan.

Gemelli, in response to a critique of his examination report, stated, "Anyone with experience in forensic medicine, and above all in the infinite variety of sores and wounds that self-destructive soldiers presented during the war, can have no doubt that these were wounds of erosion caused by the use of a caustic substance. The base of the sore and its shape are in every way similar to the sores observed in soldiers who procured them with chemical means. The color of the base, the shape of the margins, their thickness, etc., all suggest this."

In support of this theory, in 1919, a young, religious woman named Maria de Vito went to see Padre Pio. She was the cousin of a pharmacist in the Province of Foggia, the same Province where Padre Pio lived and ministered. Maria deVito received a request from Pio in a note. Her cousin, the pharmacist, recounted the event to Monsignore Salvatore Bella, the local Bishop, stating, "When she returned to Foggia she brought the greetings of Padre Pio and asked me in his name, and in strict secrecy, for carbolic acid, telling me that Padre Pio had need of it, and giving me the little bottle he had given her, capacity 100g, and with a skull and crossbones."

Though it was not stated whether this container was previously used for storing carbolic acid or not, it is clear that Padre Pio has used carbolic acid before. In Frank M. Rega's book Padre Pio and America, he notes that "Due to a shortage of doctors, Padres Paolino and Pio administered the shots, using carbolic acid as a sterilizing agent."

Carbolic acid, or phenol, is a highly acidic substance that is typically used as a cleaner or disinfectant. Due to its high acidity, it eats away at flesh and other soft biological tissue.

As for the placement of the nail marks on the hands of Jesus Christ, these have traditionally been assumed to be roughly in the center of the palms. This is not surprising, as even the artwork of the crucified or risen Jesus over the centuries depicts the nail wounds being in the center palm area. Note the term "hand" or "χειρ" in the original Greek in the Gospel of John, chapter 20, where the Apostle Thomas speaks of the nail marks in Jesus' χειρ. The Nida & Louw, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains (Vol. 1, p. 98) states the word ‘χειρ' can apply to the hand or any relevant portion of the hands, including, for example, the fingers.

Historical and medical research has recently shown that the center of the palm was not the proper placement of a nail as the muscles and bones in the hand are not strong enough to support the hanging body. The three methods used for nailing the victim’s hands to a cross were: through the bottom part of the palm and out through the wrist; nailed directly through the wrist; or between the ulna (the two bones of the forearm). The third method is not only the most secure way to anchor an individual to a cross, it is also one of the most painful. A nail through the wrist pierces through the median nerve which causes the hand to curl up in a claw-like fashion and sends a pain resembling electricity continually running down the arms. Any movement of the individual causes the nail to rub against the median nerve.

The last thing to consider regarding Padre Pio's stigmata is their disappearance after his death. As experience would suggest, wounds don't typically fade overnight, especially ones as severe and long lasting as Pio’s, and never after the body has died. This would be a strong case for the miraculous nature of the stigmata as the healing of bodily wounds after death is practically unprecedented, save for claims in the Bible and other religious writings.

Over the years Padre Pio was seen wearing fingerless gloves, supposedly worn for the sake of covering his stigmata. However, there may be an ulterior motive behind the gloves—to hide the fact that the wounds may not have been present at all times, especially toward the end of his life. Carbolic acid burns are not only toxic to the body with continual exposure but are also extremely painful. The gloves would eliminate the need for a painful process to keep up the stigmatic appearance.

Raffaele Rossi, the Bishop of Volterra, who stood in favor of the authenticity of the stigmata of Padre Pio, described them in his final examination report, stating those in the hands were "very visible,” whereas the ones in the feet "were disappearing. What could be observed resembled two dot-shaped elevations with whiter and gentler skin." 

This suggests that the ones on the feet—which were likely the least seen stigmata, along with the one on the chest—healed and faded over time. The last official examination of Padre Pio's stigmata was in 1925, forty-three years before his death.

In 2021, Father John Aurilia, OFM Cap. (Padre Pio's personal secretary) took part in a phone interview on the Reason and Theology podcast and addressed the disappearance of Pio's stigmata:

"The stigmata disappeared about a month, a month and a half before he died. Completely healed. Nothing there… So we called the bishop. Said, 'What do we do now because people know that Padre Pio has the stigmata? But there is no stigmata. So it's a problem here.' And the bishop said, 'There is no problem at all. Dress Padre Pio the way he was dressed in his lifetime.”…Socks, sandals, gloves—you know half gloves—and you know the chest covered.”

If Padre Pio allowed the wounds to heal, it would be an easy matter to a) recreate the carbolic acid scars for a season or b) cosmetically replicate it.

This examination does not aim to discredit Padre Pio or his ministry nor attempt to disprove supernatural acts as a whole. We did our best to argue against the claims that Padre Pio's stigmata were of divine origin. We've examined them from various perspectives, including:

• Historic research about the nail wounds of Jesus and other crucifixion victims and how they differ from the placement of Padre Pio’s. 

• Pio's knowledge of stigmatics in Catholic history/tradition.

• His dishonesty in pretending to be unaware of another Italian stigmatic and passing off verbatim quotes from her books as his own words. 

• His ability to obtain and apply a substance able to create convincing stigmata. 

• Clergymen in his circle and two popes doubted the authenticity of the stigmata.

I hope the information shared here has encouraged you to examine everything from all sides, including claims that you may come across in the news, on the web, or by word of mouth. 

*Cardinal O'Malley OFM Cap. Prayer, etc. Archdiocese of Boston.

Welcome to Examine Everything, where we use research, logic, reason and common sense to bring a clearer focus to the blurry edges. Our first blog examines the miracles, stigmata and other phenomena attributed to modern-day saint Padre Pio. 

********

In light of the recent Padre Pio biopic (Padre Pio, starring Shia Labeouf), I thought we could examine the life of this venerated modern Roman Catholic Saint. We’ll look at the trajectory of his career and popularity, especially the claims of supernatural phenomena that made Padre Pio stand out from his contemporaries.

Who was Padre Pio?

He was born Francesco Forgione in 1887, in the south of Italy. At the age of 15, he became a friar in the Roman Catholic Franciscan Capuchin order. After eight years Padre Pio became a priest. That was the same year the stigmata that he bore until the day of his death appeared on his palms, feet and side. 

Miracles and Growing Popularity

Padre Pio was known for performing many miracles, such as healing the sick and blind, casting out demons, prophesying, and appearing in two places at once.

He was well liked by his fellow clergy and was known for his jokes. He was so popular with the public that despite not having taken the exam to receive a preaching license, he was given honorary permission to preach. 

Padre Pio was considered a "living saint" during his ministry and many devotees attended his masses and visited him. This was even encouraged by Pope Pius XII, who assumed the papacy in 1939.

Death and Sainthood

Padre Pio often said, “After my death, I will do more. My real mission will begin after my death.” *

In his last decade Padre Pio’s health steadily declined. He died on the morning of September 23, 1968. He was 81. Some witnesses said the stigmata he bore for 50 years vanished the day he died. He is also credited with over 1,000 posthumous miracles.

In 1971, three years after Padre Pio’s death, Pope Paul VI spoke to the Capuchin order about him: 

“Look what fame he had, what a worldwide following gathered around him! But why? Perhaps because he was a philosopher? Because he was wise? Because he had resources at his disposal? Because he said Mass humbly, heard confessions from dawn to dusk and was–it is not easy to say it–one who bore the wounds of our Lord. He was a man of prayer and suffering.” **

Padre Pio was beatified in 1990 and subsequently canonized by Pope John Paul II on June 16, 2002

Also known as Saint Pius of Pietrelcina, Padre Pio is the patron saint of civil defense volunteers.

Since Pio's death, millions of pilgrims have visited the various landmarks affiliated with him: the Shrine of Padre Pio; the House of Relief of Suffering (hospital founded by Padre Pio) which offers guided tours; his exhumed body on display in a glass coffin; and the tomb he was originally buried in at Santa Maria delle Grazie Church. They are all located in San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy, where he spent his adult life.

In Part 2: Padre Pio: The Stigmatist we will examine one of the specific miraculous claims associated with Padre Pio. 

*Schug, Rev. John [1987] A Padre Pio Profile)

**Cardinal O’Malley OFM Cap. Prayer, etc”. Archdiocese of Boston.