On October 21, 2006, during the distribution of Communion in Tixtla, a religious sister noticed a reddish substance on a Host. The account names the priests involved, Leopoldo Roque and Raymundo Reyna Esteban. Subsequent examinations were summarized as detecting human blood and blood group AB. Bishop Alejo Zavala Castro assessed the event as a divine miracle in 2013. The observation, published investigative details, and later ecclesiastical procedural steps are presented in sequence below.
During a Eucharistic celebration, a reddish substance emerged on a consecrated Host. The published summary of the investigation describes it as human blood of group AB.
Further original photographs from the publisher
A Discovery during Holy Communion
The international exhibition documents the beginning on October 21, 2006: during the distribution of Communion, a religious sister noticed a reddish substance on a Host. The clergy involved included Leopoldo Roque and Raymundo Reyna Esteban. The event occurred within a Eucharistic celebration and was presented to the ecclesiastical authorities. The visible change led to the object being secured and later to the investigative program on which the episcopal assessment of 2013 rested.[1]
Human Blood and the Report of Blood Group AB
According to the published account, the investigations were coordinated by Ricardo Castañón Gómez. The summary names human blood, blood group AB, and cellular findings; it also describes indications that the substance had emerged from inside the Host. These statements go well beyond merely observing a red color. Their public foundation here is the exhibition's report of the analyses. The complete signed laboratory reports, original images, and control procedures could not be obtained from it. The blood-group statement is therefore attributed to the documented investigation report and is not presented as a newly and independently repeated analysis.[1]
Bishop Zavala Castro's Declaration of 2013
On October 12, 2013, Alejo Zavala Castro attributed supernatural character to the event. The extract reproduced in the exhibition thus constitutes an expressly favorable assessment by the responsible bishop. It belongs among the substantial facts of the case's history. The source form available here is the published reproduction of the extract, not a fully examined original copy of the pastoral letter.[1]
Observation, Laboratory Finding, and Ecclesiastical Judgment
The assessment connects three steps: first comes the discovery on the Host during the celebration; this is followed by identification of the material; finally, its origin under the specific circumstances is considered. The details concerning human blood and cells are therefore significant for Tixtla. They concern examined material and cannot be dismissed through a general reference to red stains. At the same time, every sample's provenance must remain connected to the observed Host. A blood group describes a biological property; it does not by itself identify an individual. The strength of the overall argument arises from the connection between event, secured object, finding, and ecclesiastical examination.[1][2]
A Call to Reverence for the Eucharist
The spiritual meaning lies in Christ's real presence and his self-giving for humanity. The visible blood directs attention to the Lord whom the Church venerates under the sacramental species. A material investigation can establish properties of a sample; personal attribution to Christ arises in the miracle judgment from the Eucharistic event and its religious context. The particular event thus leads to Mass and adoration. Transubstantiation itself is not a biological transformation that would have to become visible in every consecrated Host through the same methods.[1][2]
Witnesses & Investigators
The Unnamed Religious Sister
Direct observer according to the event account
Noticed the reddish substance during the distribution of Communion; her testimony is reproduced in the exhibition.[1]
Ricardo Castañón Gómez
Coordinator of the investigations
The published account attributes the investigative program and compilation of its results to him.[1]
Alejo Zavala Castro and Salvador Rangel
Successive diocesan bishops
Zavala Castro gave a favorable judgment in 2013; Rangel confirmed the renewed ecclesiastical investigation in 2022.[1][2]
The unfolding story
- Discovery on the Host
A religious sister notices the reddish substance during the distribution of Communion.[1]
- Investigative Phase
The published account describes the coordinated research program.[1]
- Favorable Episcopal Declaration
In the published extract, Zavala Castro honors the event as a divine miracle.[1]
- New Examination Confirmed
Rangel explains in the interview that the renewed process is not yet complete.[2]
Ecclesiastical assessment
The exhibition reproduces Bishop Zavala Castro's favorable declaration of 2013. His successor Salvador Rangel confirmed in 2022 that a renewed diocesan examination was then still unfinished. No later final decision is documented in the sources examined.
What Is the Status of the Renewed Investigation?
In a direct interview with ACI Prensa on February 15, 2022, Bishop Salvador Rangel stated that he had consulted Rome and ordered a renewed investigation. Its conclusions were not yet available; the diocesan process was unfinished. This information describes the procedural status at that time. It does not remove the historical existence of the declaration of 2013, but requires both ecclesiastical steps to be named. The sources examined here document neither a later favorable conclusion nor a final rejection.[2]
A Renewed Examination Is Not a Refutation
Ordering further investigations initially means that the responsible ecclesiastical authority seeks additional clarification. It proves neither an error by the witnesses nor a natural cause of the examined material. The Church professes Christ's real presence in the Eucharist independently of this individual event. It can therefore take the existing positive testimonies seriously while continuing their closer examination. For Tixtla, the discovery of 2006, reported investigation results, and favorable assessment of 2013 remain the starting points for further clarification.[2]
Objections & Answers
Why Is Tixtla Frequently Called a Recognized Miracle?
The description has a specific basis: the favorable episcopal declaration of 2013. It is not a fabricated attribution and expressly belongs in the account. For a fully documented account of the ecclesiastical procedural status, Rangel's statement of 2022 must also be included. The renewed investigation cannot be omitted, but neither is it a published negative substantive judgment. An accurate description therefore retains the favorable declaration and names the later instruction to investigate with its documented status.[1][2]
Is an Open Proceeding Already an Objection to the Miracle?
An open proceeding does not yet decide the substantive question. It can be treated neither as refutation nor as additional recognition. For Tixtla, there are the reported observation, published investigative details, and favorable judgment of a responsible bishop. Further scientific assessment requires the complete laboratory records; the overall ecclesiastical assessment requires a final documented decision. These outstanding steps do not remove the existing positive testimonies. They determine which further questions need clarification for a comprehensive assessment.[2]
Meaning for faith
Tixtla has a specific event account, a described investigative program, and Bishop Zavala Castro's favorable assessment. The renewed investigation confirmed in 2022 must be considered as a distinct later step. The existing testimonies direct attention to reverence for Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.[1][2]
How Eucharistic Miracles Are Examined
Securing the account of events, identifying the material, and reading the Church's judgment precisely.
Methods of examination and ecclesiastical procedure →Sources & Evidence
Information on accessibility and scope helps you assess the evidence for yourself.
- [1] Tixtla
Secondary exhibition; complete laboratory reports and complete pastoral letter not accessible here.
Open source · realpresence.org ↗ - [2] ¿Está aprobado por la Iglesia el “milagro” eucarístico de Tixtla en México?
Primary interview on the bishop's own procedural decision; not a technical material analysis.
Open source · aciprensa.com ↗ - [3] Tixtla: Spanish Exhibition Panel
Parallel version to s1, not an independent second source. Used to compare the quoted episcopal wording.
Open source · miracolieucaristici.org ↗