Levitations

What the term "levitation" designates

The term levitation comes from the Latin levitas (lightness) and literally means to rise or float. In the vocabulary of Catholic mystical theology, it is reserved for a precise type of phenomenon: the elevation of a body or an object above the ground without known physical means, in a religious context and often during a state of orison.^[3]

The term entered the technical Catholic vocabulary through the great treatises on mystical theology of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, notably Adolphe Tanquerey's Précis de théologie ascétique et mystique and the work of Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange.^[4][5] It does not designate just any leap, startle or subjective impression of elevation, but a phenomenon that is objectively observable — at least in the eyes of the witnesses present.

The two main forms

The tradition distinguishes two main forms:

The levitation of persons occurs most often during a mystical ecstasy or a rapture (raptus in Latin). The saint, absorbed in contemplation, rises from the ground sometimes by a few centimetres, sometimes by several metres. The accounts frequently describe a partial anaesthesia: the subject does not perceive the elevation or pays it no attention. In other cases, the saint actively resists and does not manage to do so.

The levitation of sacred objects (hosts, monstrances, crucifixes) designates a different category: these are Eucharistic miracles in which a consecrated object appears suspended in mid-air without visible support, sometimes for several hours, before a great number of witnesses. The case of Faverney (1608) is the most documented example of this.

These two categories do not fall under the same evidentiary dossier nor the same theological context. The first is bound up with personal mysticism and ecstasy; the second belongs to the category of Eucharistic miracles and must be examined according to criteria specific to those phenomena.

A descriptive, not normative, typology

The best contemporary historian of the subject, Joachim Bouflet, warns against any too rigid framework: after going through several hundred files, he refuses to freeze the phenomenon into a single pattern.

"It is impossible to confine the phenomenon within a framework that is too rigid, predefined. Each example presents itself as a unique, original case." — Joachim Bouflet, Encyclopédie des phénomènes extraordinaires dans la vie mystique, vol. 1^[6]

By cross-referencing the best-attested files, four broad families nevertheless emerge, on a purely descriptive basis:

1. Complete suspension without support — the body is entirely separated from the ground, horizontal or vertical, sometimes high enough for an observer to pass a hand beneath it.
2. Abnormal balance or minimal support — the body rests on a point of contact physically insufficient to hold it up: the tip of a toe, a knee, a finger. Colonel Albert de Rochas thus describes the mystic Victoire Clair: "I saw her, with deep astonishment [...] remain thus suspended, her right leg folded beneath her, the other touching the ground only with the toe."^[7]
3. Abnormal lightness when carried — the subject, in ecstasy, becomes so light as to seem to weigh nothing at all, without however leaving the ground.
4. Extraordinary heaviness, or "counter-levitation" — an inverse phenomenon most often observed in ecstasies of the Passion: the body becomes impossible to lift, even by several strong men (see the section devoted to this phenomenon below).

This typology has no value as a law: it serves only to avoid calling by the same name "levitation" phenomena of a different nature, which would artificially inflate the corpus and weaken the best-established files.

Ecstasy, rapture, and the body

Catholic mystical theology carefully distinguishes mystical union (in which the soul's external faculties continue to function) from rapture (raptus or excessus mentis), in which the external senses are suspended and the body may be affected.^[8]

Teresa of Ávila, in her Book of Her Life, is the first great Catholic mystic to have described her own levitations in the first person and with rare psychological precision. In Chapter XX, she explicitly distinguishes union from rapture:

« Rapture goes far beyond union and produces far greater effects. One may say that union is like the beginning, the middle, and the end, but only within, whereas rapture, being of a much higher degree of elevation, works not only within but also without. » — Saint Teresa of Ávila, The Book of Her Life, ch. XX^[9]

This theological point is crucial. Levitation, when it occurs, is not an autonomous phenomenon: it appears as the external bodily effect of a rapture that engages the interior first. It is neither sought nor provoked by the person. Teresa describes it as something done to her, not something she does.

What Thomas Aquinas says about rapture

Thomas Aquinas treats raptus directly in the Summa Theologiae (IIa-IIae, q. 175). He defines it as an elevation by a higher power of that which is in accord with nature toward that which surpasses nature.^[10] Ecstasy involves a withdrawal of ordinary sensory perception, without the soul separating from the body (of which it remains the form).

Thomas emphasizes that in the most intense states of rapture, the intellect may be suspended in the contemplation of a reality that ordinarily exceeds its powers, as with Saint Paul in the third heaven. He remains open on the question of whether Paul was then in the body or out of the body — and Saint Paul himself refrains from settling the matter in the Second Letter to the Corinthians:

« I know a man in Christ who, fourteen years ago — whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows — such a man was caught up to the third heaven. » — Saint Paul, 2 Corinthians 12:2–3 (Jerusalem Bible)^[11]

For Aquinas, this honesty on the Apostle's part signals the limit of what a man can perceive of his own ecstatic state. It also grounds the Church's constant prudence: even in the authentic mystic, the awareness of what is happening to them is partial and subject to the Church's discernment.^[12]

Bodily levitation strictly speaking is not the heart of Thomas's treatise, but it falls within the logic of rapture: if the soul is raised to a state that surpasses the ordinary, it is not incoherent that the body, of which it is the form, should be affected as well.

The warning of John of the Cross

Saint John of the Cross represents, within the Catholic mystical tradition, the most demanding current of discernment regarding extraordinary phenomena. In the Ascent of Mount Carmel and the Dark Night, he carefully distinguishes sensible consolations, visions, and bodily phenomena from the true fruits of divine union.^[13]

His position is not that these phenomena do not exist: he acknowledges them as possible. But he warns that the soul advanced on the spiritual way must not cling to them and must regard them as secondary. Levitations cease, moreover, in the best-documented cases, as progress in the mystical life continues — Teresa of Ávila herself notes with relief that her elevations in public eventually stopped.

« These bodily and outward works that God sometimes performs in souls, such as raising them up, causing them to swoon, suspending them in His embraces, do not always profit the soul as much as they seem to, nor as much as those most pure and simple communications of interior spiritual favours. » — Saint John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel, Book II, ch. II^[14]

This point is theologically decisive: levitation is neither a criterion of sanctity nor a good in itself. It is a possible bodily trace of an interior grace, not the grace itself.

The three possible origins

Catholic theology distinguishes three possible origins for apparent levitation phenomena:^[15]

1. Supernatural (God): levitation is an effect of divine grace upon a body in a state of mystical rapture. This is the only category that mystical theology regards positively.

2. Prenatural (demonic intervention): scholastic theologians admit that the demon can act upon physical nature, including bodies, and produce imitations of supernatural phenomena. The Church takes this possibility into account in its discernment of extraordinary phenomena.

3. Natural (fraud, illusion, error of observation): a sudden leap, a slow fall, a deceptive angle of view, a concealed support, an account embellished over time, or an observation made in insufficient lighting conditions.

Catholic prudence always begins with the third category, then examines the second before admitting the first.

Joseph of Cupertino: the best-documented case

The file on Saint Joseph of Cupertino (1603–1663) is unique in Catholic history for its documentary density. The Jesuit Herbert Thurston, who devoted his career to the critical study of mystical phenomena, regards this file as the most massive in the Christian tradition.^[16] The Abbé Arcangelo Rosmi, a contemporary of Joseph in Assisi, is said to have noted about seventy levitations for that period alone; the Franciscan Gustavo Parisciani identified over one hundred and fifty eyewitness testimonies in the Vatican archives for the Assisi years.^[17]

What sets this file apart is not only the volume, but the quality of the witnesses (several under oath, with deposition procedures explicitly warning against exaggeration) and the ecclesial reaction: Joseph was not promoted as an attraction, but isolated, moved, and monitored. The superiors feared the influx of the curious and the disruption of conventual life. Joseph, for his part, obeyed without resistance.

See the detailed article : The Levitations of Saint Joseph of Cupertino (1603–1663)

Teresa of Ávila: the reluctant levitator

Saint Teresa of Ávila (1515–1582), reformer of the Carmelite Order and Doctor of the Church, is the most valuable case for mystical theology because of the quality of her testimony: she describes her own levitations in the first person, with a candour and psychological precision unmatched in the mystical tradition.^[18]

In Chapter XX of the Book of Her Life, she describes her total powerlessness to resist the elevation:

« En d'autres temps il m'était absolument impossible de m'opposer à un mouvement si violent ; je me sentais ensuite enlever l'âme et la tête sans que je pusse l'empêcher, et quelquefois tout mon corps, en sorte qu'il ne touchait plus à terre. » — Saint Teresa of Ávila, The Book of Her Life, ch. XX^[19]

She also describes the physical sensation that accompanies the resistance:

« Dans la résistance que je faisais pour m'empêcher d'être ainsi élevée de terre, je sentais sous mes pieds quelque chose qui me poussait avec tant de violence, que je ne saurais à quoi la comparer, nul autre de tous les mouvements qui se passent dans l'esprit n'ayant rien qui approche d'une telle impétuosité ; et ce combat que j'éprouvais en moi-même était si grand, que j'en avais le corps tout rompu sans pouvoir rien gagner par ma résistance, à cause qu'il faut que tout cède au pouvoir infini de Dieu. » — Saint Teresa of Ávila, The Book of Her Life, ch. XX^[20]

Public embarrassment and answered prayer

Two scenes from the Book of Her Life illustrate the deep embarrassment these levitations caused Teresa. The first takes place in the choir during Communion, in the presence of all the nuns. The second occurs during a sermon, in the presence of ladies of rank:

« Commençant à sentir que la même chose m'allait arriver, je me jetai par terre, nos sœurs s'approchèrent de moi pour me retenir ; mais cela ne put empêcher qu'on s'en aperçût. Je priai alors beaucoup Notre-Seigneur de ne plus me favoriser de ces grâces qui paraissent à l'extérieur sans pouvoir être cachées, et qui me donnaient tant de peine. » — Saint Teresa of Ávila, The Book of Her Life, ch. XX^[21]

She notes, with what reads like quiet relief, that this prayer was answered: the public levitations ceased. This detail is apologetically important: someone pretending to levitate in order to impress would not pray for it to stop, nor speak with such candour about the embarrassment felt.

The Public Domain Review, an online academic publication specialising in the history of ideas, devoted an article to this dimension of Teresa's figure under the evocative title « The Reluctant Levitator » — the unwilling levitator.^[22]

An external confirmation: the deposition of Anne of the Incarnation

Teresa's autobiographical account receives a valuable external confirmation. She herself describes the inward sensation of lightness that often precedes the complete elevation:

« Souvent, ce me semble, mon corps devenait si léger qu'il perdait toute sa pesanteur ; parfois même c'était à tel point que je ne sentais plus pour ainsi dire mes pieds toucher le sol. » — Saint Teresa of Ávila, Life Written by Herself, ch. XX^[23]

A nun in her circle, Anne of the Incarnation, testified at the ordinary process of Segovia that she had directly verified the absence of support, passing her hands beneath the saint's feet during a prolonged ecstasy:

« Je m'approchai doucement, mis mes mains sous ses pieds que je couvris de mes larmes pendant toute la durée de l'extase, qui se prolongea peut-être une demi-heure. » — Anne of the Incarnation, deposition at the ordinary process of Segovia^[24]

This double source — the mystic's interior account and the tactile check by an external witness recorded at the process — makes Teresa's file one of the best cross-verified in the entire Catholic tradition.

André-Hubert Fournet: a court deposition with distance, height, and duration

Saint André-Hubert Fournet (1752–1834), founder of the Daughters of the Cross, offers one of the tradition's most rigorous files, precisely because it rests on a formal court deposition, with distance, height, and duration specified by an identified witness.

On 24 June 1827 or 1828, in broad daylight, during a preaching at La Puye, children report that the priest "is in the air". Sister Saint-Vincent-de-Paul, positioned four or five steps away with no visual obstruction, testifies to having seen him about a foot above the step for ten to twelve minutes:

« Je vis, de fait, le serviteur de Dieu qui ne touchait plus le pavé et qui se tenait élevé environ d'un pied au-dessus du petit gradin de pierre sur lequel il était placé. Je vis et je considérai très clairement le serviteur de Dieu dans cette position. J'étais à quatre ou cinq pas environ du Bon Père, et personne n'était placé entre lui et moi et ne pouvait m'empêcher de le considérer à mon aise. [...] il se passa dix ou douze minutes, durant lesquelles je considérai attentivement cette élévation au-dessus du sol. » — Sister Saint-Vincent-de-Paul, deposition at the informative process, session 87-56^[25]

Other witnesses and other episodes are recorded in the informative and apostolic processes — two distinct stages of the canonical investigation of a cause for canonisation, each with its own sessions and witnesses — including eight consecutive days of levitation at Mass in Issy.^[26] This hierarchy of sources is precisely what Catholic prudence demands: a deposition contemporaneous with the events, under oath, with distance and duration specified, weighs infinitely more than a late hagiographic account or an uncorroborated rumour.

The Santinha of Arrifana: the densest file of the modern tradition

Ana de Jesus Maria José Magalhães (1826–1875), known as la Santinha d'Arrifana — the little saint of Arrifana, in Portugal — offers the densest file produced by the nineteenth century. Paralysed and bedridden from 1840, at fourteen years old, she experienced levitations almost daily from 1846–1847 until her death in 1875 — that is, twenty-nine years of a repeated phenomenon, observed by dozens of witnesses, priests, and doctors.

The parish priest multiplied his observations and allowed doctors, believers or not, to test the phenomenon. Dr Manuel Maciel Leite e Araujo passed his arms and hands under her entire body:

« Pour m'assurer de la réalité de ce fait insolite, j'ai passé mes bras étendus et mes mains sous tout son corps, et l'ai trouvé effectivement soulevé sans aucun appui et immobile. » — Dr Manuel Maciel Leite e Araujo, medical testimony^[27]

Dr João Grainha, the district judge, carried out an even more rigorous test: a physiological stimulus intended to verify the absence of reaction, before the tactile check.

"The doctor, the district judge [...] lit a cigar but, instead of smoking it, blew puffs of smoke into the mouth, nostrils and eyes of the Servant of God, without her reacting in the slightest. Immediately afterwards, he passed his hands under her body and found that she was raised above the bed without any support." — Dr João Grainha, medical testimony^[28]

Four types of ecstasy, linked to a precise spiritual act

The file makes it possible to establish a rare empirical typology: Bouflet distinguishes, from the testimonies, four categories each linked to a precise act of piety rather than to a permanent faculty — nocturnal ecstasies of orison, ecstasies after communion (often two to three hours), ecstasies on Good Friday (from noon to 3 p.m., arms outstretched in a cross) and ecstasies during the "outings of the Lord", when the viaticum was carried through the village and Ana oriented her head or body towards the Blessed Sacrament at a distance.

"Every year, on Good Friday, she fell at noon into a great prostration and remained in this state until three o'clock, her arms outstretched in a cross [...] she maintained this prodigious horizontal suspension of the body, in an attitude imitating that of the Redeemer crucified and dying." — Declarations of Fr José Domingues Arede and Ana Gomes^[29]

This file brings together what the critical method requires: long duration, repetition, diversity of witnesses, tactile checks, controlled physiological stimulus, documented horizontal immobility and a constant link with a precise eucharistic context — a condition rarely met to this degree across the whole of the tradition.

Alphonsus Liguori and the levitation of Foggia

Saint Alphonsus Liguori (1696–1787), founder of the Redemptorists and Doctor of the Church, is reported to have been raised about 80 centimetres above the pulpit while preaching in Foggia in 1746, before the entire congregation assembled.^[30] A similar episode is mentioned at Amalfi, during a homily on the Mother of God. As these phenomena occurred during public preaching, the witnesses are numerous and identifiable — a condition that makes these accounts more serious than late or private reports.

The canonisation of Alphonsus by Pius VII in 1839 took into account the whole of his mystical life dossier, which included other extraordinary phenomena (alleged bilocation at the death of Pope Clement XIV in 1774, seen in a state of prostration for several hours before announcing the pope's death).

Peter of Alcántara, Martin de Porres and other cases

Saint Peter of Alcántara (1499–1562), Franciscan reformer and friend of Teresa of Ávila, is mentioned among the levitating saints in classical hagiographical sources. Teresa herself, who knew him as spiritual director in the last years of his life, recounts in chapter XXVII of her autobiography having seen him transfigured and raised from the ground during prayer. Canonised by Clement IX in 1669, he appears in the list of well-attested cases that Garrigou-Lagrange retains for Catholic mystical theology.^[31]

Saint Martin de Porres (1579–1639), a mulatto Dominican religious of Peru, is associated with numerous mystical phenomena documented in his canonisation process. Brothers of the convent of the Holy Rosary in Lima report having found him raised several feet above the ground during nocturnal prayer, his face turned towards the crucifix, with no visible support. The process, opened in the decades following his death, collects sworn depositions that are among the most precise for a Latin American saint of that period.^[32]

Other cases historically mentioned include Saint Philip Neri (1515–1595), founder of the Oratory — whose Bacci (a biography written during his lifetime) evokes ecstasies and unusual bodily phenomena —, Saint Paul of the Cross (1694–1775), founder of the Passionists, whose chronicles report elevations in prayer, and according to some sources Thomas Aquinas himself, reported to have risen slightly during a prayer before the crucifix in a Dominican chapel — an episode whose historical value remains debated, but which appears in several ancient hagiographies.^[33]

A file of priests caught at the altar: eight cross-referenced cases

A notable share of the well-attested files concerns priests seized in the very act of liturgical celebration or preaching — a context in which the witnesses are, by nature, numerous and attentive. The following table cross-references eight files studied by Bouflet in his 2006 monograph:

The most usable quotation from this corpus concerns Michel Garicoïts, founder of the Priests of the Sacred Heart of Bétharram, surprised by a faithful member during the very elevation of the Blessed Sacrament:

"As I bowed to adore the holy species, I was most surprised to see that Father Garicoïts' feet were not touching the altar step. He was raised 10 to 15 centimetres above the ground. [...] I observed this phenomenon both during the elevation of the host and during the elevation of the chalice." — Jean-Baptiste Taillefer de Bénéjacq, deposition at the ordinary informative process^[35]

This table makes no claim to completeness: it selects files where the presence of several witnesses, a public celebration and a process deposition intersect, and deliberately leaves aside weaker traditions or those with a single witness.

Modern cases of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries

The nineteenth–twentieth-century corpus brings together a series of files less well known to the general public, but whose documentary quality is sometimes superior to the most famous cases.

Edvige Carboni: a double level of proof

Edvige Carboni (1880–1952), a stigmatised Sardinian seamstress, offers a file on two levels: the spontaneous reaction of a child witness, then the deliberate tactile check of an adult.

"I was left astounded on seeing the Servant of God raised more than a metre above the floor, in the attitude of prayer. I could not help crying out: 'Mum, a woman who is flying!'" — Chiara Maria Cuccuru, deposition at the ordinary informative process^[36]

A second witness, Mariangela Oggianu, saw her about 20 centimetres above the prie-dieu; a third, Elena Sanna, "wished to have proof of it by touching her", took her by the arm, led her back to the altar, then saw her rise again.^[37]

Eusebia Palomino: the phenomenon ceases on the superior's order

Blessed Eusebia Palomino (1899–1935), a Salesian religious, illustrates a constant feature of the best files: immediate obedience to authority.

"Very docile to the voice of obedience, she came back to herself as her foot touched the pavement and, raising her eyes to her superior, begged her to say nothing to anyone of what had just taken place." — Testimony reported by Domenica Grassiano^[38]

Brother Ave Maria: a witness turned blessed

Cesare Pisano, known as Brother Ave Maria (1900–1964), a blind Italian hermit, was observed through a half-open door by a witness who would himself later be canonized, Blessed Luigi Orione:

"I could swear that I saw Brother Ave Maria lifted off the ground, about this high (around 40 cm), while he was reading The Imitation of Christ." — Blessed Luigi Orione^[39]

Francisca Ana Cirer Carbonell: three documented postures in the same religious sister

Blessed Francisca Ana Cirer Carbonell (1781–1855), a Majorcan religious sister, offers a rare case file because it documents three distinct postures in the same person: horizontal above the bed, seated without touching the seat, and kneeling.

"She was raised in the air, keeping a seated position, but without touching her seat or the ground. The ecstasy lasted a long time, and the many witnesses were able to hear her speak." — Testimony reproduced by Francisco Fornés^[40]

"She was kneeling, raised from the ground by three and a half palms, and the appearance of her face was not natural, for she shed abundant tears, like someone who suffers greatly." — Magdalena Mir Serra, deposition at the ordinary informative process^[41]

From all over Majorca, and even from neighbouring towns, people came to witness her daily levitations as one goes to a show — but Bouflet notes that "the actress, nothing of a show-off, suffered greatly from the publicity the prodigy afforded her".^[42]

Correction: Padre Pio and Marthe Robin are not established cases

It is common to hear levitations attributed to Padre Pio or Marthe Robin. An examination of the documents of their canonization causes does not confirm this popular tradition:

"Of the Capuchin Padre Pio da Pietrelcina (1887–1968), there is no evidence that he was subject to levitation [...] The documents of the beatification proceedings do not mention the phenomenon. The same holds for Marthe Robin [...] My study of the sources making up the material for the beatification of Marthe Robin led me to establish that there was never the slightest levitation in her life." — Joachim Bouflet, Encyclopédie des phénomènes extraordinaires dans la vie mystique, vol. 1^[43]

This correction matters: a rigorous article must not mechanically pile up the most famous names. The silence of the cause files carries more weight than rumour, however widespread it may be.

Theres Neumann: two episodes, one involving direct tactile control

The Bavarian stigmatic Theres Neumann (1898–1962) presents a more modest levitation record than her famous Passion ecstasies, witnessed every Good Friday by thousands of the faithful until her death.^[44] Two episodes of levitation are nevertheless recorded, with direct tactile control in the first:

"To be sure she was not the plaything of an illusion, the abbess passed her hand several times beneath Thérèse's legs, whose dress hung without touching the ground." — Account collected from Abbess Benedikta Spiegel on 29 September 1934^[45]

The second episode, dated 15 August 1938 in Tirschenreuth (15 to 20 cm above the ground), rests on the attestation of a witness collected twelve years later — a later source, to be explicitly distinguished from the immediate tactile control of the first episode.^[46]

Maria Concetta Pantusa and Tomasina Pozzi: two twentieth-century Italian case files

Maria Concetta Pantusa experienced her first ecstasy with levitation in 1918, in the presence of five people:

"Her first ecstasy with levitation took place in 1918, in the presence of five people [...] she rose more than a metre above the ground, to the astonishment of those close to her." — Account reproduced from Tomaso Tatangelo^[47]

Bouflet notes that doctors, psychologists, and members of the clergy attested to these phenomena, without however specifying their names in this passage — a nuance to be respected rather than artificially filled in.

Tomasina Pozzi, a religious sister, offers a case file measured with precision by two named witnesses:

"To have seen Sister Tomasina once in the refectory, while we were eating, rise from the ground and remain without touching it, raised in the air by 30 centimetres, for about ten minutes." — Depositions of Sisters Giovanna Masa and Clementina Caproni^[48]

Maria Giuseppina Catanea: a displacement without movement of the feet

The case file of Maria Giuseppina di Gesù Crocifisso (Maria Giuseppina Catanea), a religious sister afflicted with multiple sclerosis and unable to walk without support, presents a rare episode of movement in ecstasy without any apparent motion of the feet, dated 28 July 1943:

"At the moment she kisses the hand of the saint, the wind suddenly carries her away and, whereas shortly before she had been unable to walk without support, here she is, arms outstretched, skimming the ground without moving her feet and, her face transfigured, flying back and forth several times along the garden paths." — Postulator's testimony, 1976^[49]

Panorama and statistics: Görres, Leroy, Thurston, Bouflet

The major comparative studies on Christian mystical levitation converge on similar orders of magnitude, without ever coinciding exactly — each having applied different criteria and a different scope.

Joseph von Görres (1776–1848), German Catholic philosopher, author of La Mystique divine, naturelle et diabolique (5 volumes, 1836–1842), the first great systematic repertoire, counted 72 saints associated with the phenomenon in the Catholic tradition.^[50]

Olivier Leroy, in La Lévitation. Contribution historique et critique à l'étude du merveilleux (Paris, Valois, 1928, 388 p.), the first modern academic treatment of the subject devoted entirely to this question, counted 60 cases in the first ten months of the Acta Sanctorum alone — some 0.6 % of 14,000 saints — before estimating that at least 200 cases in total were mentioned in sources of interest across the whole of the tradition.^[51]

Herbert Thurston, S.J. (1856–1939), British Jesuit and member of the Society for Psychical Research, is the author of the most complete critical work: The Physical Phenomena of Mysticism (Burns Oates and Washbourne / Henry Regnery Company, 1952, posthumous publication, 419 p.).^[52] He listed more than 200 cases, but estimated that only a third had evidence that was "at the very least respectable". His rigorous historical methodology separates well-established testimonies from late accounts, identifies the conditions of observation, and refuses to draw conclusions where the data are insufficient.

Joachim Bouflet, in his 2006 monograph and then in his Encyclopédie des phénomènes extraordinaires dans la vie mystique (2002–2015), provides the tightest figures: having studied the 305 people beatified between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (martyrs excluded) as of June 2001, he found that 26 of them, or 8.5 %, had presented levitation phenomena supported by numerous and indisputable testimonies.

“By studying the list of 305 people who lived in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries who have been beatified to date (June 2001) — excluding martyrs, whether individual or in groups — I found that 26 of them displayed levitation phenomena during their lives, or 8.5 % of the total number. And I only retained cases reported by numerous and unquestionable testimonies.” — Joachim Bouflet, Encyclopédie des phénomènes extraordinaires dans la vie mystique, vol. 1^[53]

These figures are not proof in themselves. They show that the phenomenon is widespread enough in tradition not to be reduced to an isolated legend, and rare enough among saints and blesseds as a whole to be clearly exceptional — the overwhelming majority of canonization causes mention no phenomenon of this kind.

The Garabandal apparitions case (1961–1965), defended by Ignispedia as one of the best medically attested Marian cases of the twentieth century, includes a levitation episode less well known than the “little miracle of the host” of 18 July 1962, but just as precisely documented.

The witness Don Juan Alvarez Seco reports having seen Conchita's body, in ecstasy, completely separated from the ground in a horizontal position, and having tried to verify the absence of support with his own hand:

“Conchita, still in ecstasy, had just lain down on the ground, on her back. Suddenly I saw her whole body, horizontal, completely separated from the ground. I wanted to make sure I was not dreaming by passing my hand between her body and the ground, but I could not, because it lasted only a few seconds. I make it quite clear that for me, there is no doubt.” — Don Juan Alvarez Seco, testimony^[54]

A second testimony, this time collective, gives a measured height, a timed duration and a written transmission to the diocesan authority — precisely the conditions required by the Catholic critical method:

“We saw her rise to a height of ten centimetres while keeping the same lying position. From that point, she made three rocking movements [...] After a minute and a half (we checked the time), she began to lower very slowly [...] All of us signed a report of this extraordinary fact and handed it over to don Valentín, so that he would send it to the Lord Bishop of Santander.” — Collective report, transmitted to the bishopric of Santander^[55]

Joachim Bouflet, whose overall position on the Garabandal case is reserved — he criticises in particular the seers' fast ecstatic walks, for lack of measurements and independent counter-testing — nevertheless does not reject this specific levitation episode: he reports it with its full parameters (height, timed duration, plurality of witnesses, written transmission to the bishop), even acknowledging, regarding the hypothesis of a diabolical origin, that “being a bit hasty” would be a conclusion reached too quickly, reality being “certainly more complex”.^[56] That even an author generally cautious about this case retains this episode with such wealth of detail makes it one of the best-documented levitation cases of the twentieth century — consistent with the favourable position Ignispedia defends for the Garabandal case as a whole.

A Distinct Phenomenon

Eucharistic levitations refer to episodes in which a consecrated host or monstrance appears to remain in midair without support. These are Eucharistic miracles of a particular kind, whose cases are examined according to the procedures proper to the recognition of Eucharistic miracles.^[57]

These phenomena are to be distinguished from the levitations of persons on at least three points: the subject is not a human being animated by a soul, the conditions of observation may be better or worse depending on the circumstances, and the issue at stake is different (the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, not the personal mystical life of a saint).

The Miracle of Faverney (1608)

The case of Faverney (Haute-Saône) is the best documented of the Eucharistic levitations recognized by the Catholic Church. During the night of 25 to 26 May 1608, a fire breaks out in the abbey church of Notre-Dame de Faverney during an exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. The flames destroy the hangings, the repository, and all the decoration. The monstrance, containing two consecrated hosts, is then seen suspended in midair without support, about a foot and a half above the scorched corporal.

The elevation lasts about 33 hours, attested by numerous witnesses present at the abbey church. The monstrance descends gently on 27 May, drawn down by the prayers of the faithful according to contemporary accounts. The Archbishop of Besançon, Ferdinand de Rye, issues an official report as early as 10 July 1608, based on the depositions gathered.^[58]

Official recognition from Rome comes more than two centuries later, on 16 May 1864, under Pius IX. The Church's caution in this delay is characteristic: she does not recognize miracles out of immediate enthusiasm, but at the end of a lengthy investigation.

See the detailed article: The Eucharistic miracle of Faverney (1608)

Modern Video Cases

Since the 1990s, video footage has circulated purporting to show hosts rising during the elevation or Eucharistic adoration. These cases call for heightened caution for additional reasons: video compression, perspective, image manipulation, light effects captured by cameras but invisible to the naked eye, and viral dissemination that rapidly amplifies poorly documented phenomena or ones documented hardly at all.

The case of Lourdes (1999), circulated on Catholic websites, is the most discussed example. Several analyses have concluded in favor of an optical or technical explanation, without it having been possible to establish the authenticity of the phenomenon. The Church has not ruled in favor of this case.^[59]

The rule of prudence is unchanging: a video alone never constitutes proof, given the multiplicity of possible technical explanations.

The Foundational Criterion: See, Approach, Touch

Modern Catholic critical method rests on a criterion of disarming simplicity, formulated by Herbert Thurston and taken up in full by Bouflet at the opening of his inquiry:

"Given sufficient light and reasonably normal conditions, the least educated witness is competent to declare whether a certain person is standing on the ground or is raised in the air, all the more so because, owing to the trance-like state of the subject of the inquiry, the witness has every opportunity to approach and to verify by the sense of touch that the spectacle before his eyes is not an illusion." — Herbert Thurston, cited by Joachim Bouflet^[60]

This criterion shifts the debate: the question is not whether a levitation is a priori possible, but whether an ordinary witness, placed in normal conditions, with the opportunity to approach and touch, has actually verified the absence of support. It is precisely this filter that separates the cases of Fournet, of the Santinha d'Arrifana, or of Garicoïts — where tactile contact is explicitly reported — from vague traditions that do not allow it.

Ordinary Explanations to Be Exhausted First

A credible account of levitation must have survived a serious confrontation with natural explanations. The main ones are:^[61]

• Involuntary or voluntary jump: a sudden movement of the knees or feet may be interpreted as an elevation, especially if the observer is at a distance or in dim light.
• Concealed support: thread, rod, hook, or inclined surface. For ancient accounts, this is often impossible to verify retroactively.
• Optical illusion: viewing angle, incense smoke, reflections, poor lighting, or glare.
• Account embellished over time: a memory of a few centimeters can become several meters in an enthusiastic hagiographic tradition. Thurston insists on this risk and accepts only contemporary testimony of the facts.^[62]
• The witness's psychological state: a witness in a state of deep devotion or intense expectation may perceive more than he actually sees.

Conditions for Credible Documentation

Thurston and Leroy converge on the minimal criteria that make a levitation case worthy of examination:^[63][64]

1. Contemporary witnesses (not dating from decades after the fact)
2. Multiplicity of witnesses (several independent persons, ideally of different profiles)
3. Precise observation conditions (distance, lighting, angle)
4. Significant duration (an elevation of several seconds is more improbable than a brief start)
5. Measurable height (or estimated by persons present)
6. The reaction of the person concerned (Is she conscious? Does she resist? Is she embarrassed?)
7. Context of inquiry or deposition (judicial procedure, canonization process, sworn testimony)

The case of Joseph of Cupertino, that of Fournet, and that of the Santinha d'Arrifana meet the majority of these criteria. The case of Teresa of Avila is unique of its kind because it is autobiographical — but its quality lies precisely in Teresa's honesty about her own embarrassment and her attempts at resistance.

Maria de la Visitación: A Confession That Proves Nothing Simple

The history of mysticism acknowledges cases of proven fraud. But Bouflet points out a reverse methodological trap, just as real: a confession of fraud is not automatically a satisfactory explanation if it is itself incoherent.

The Portuguese Dominican Maria de la Visitación declared in 1588 that she had simulated stigmata, halo, and levitations. But the methods confessed contradict each other from one interrogation to the next: a mechanical device operated by a crank, then high wooden clogs; candles, then a circle of fire pots.

"I have difficulty accepting the confession that the prioress produced the effect of rising into the air by some mechanical device whose handle she slowly turned, or that candles could have been arranged in her cell so as to surround her face with a mysterious halo of light." — Herbert Thurston, cited by Joachim Bouflet^[65]

Bouflet considers it possible that she "confessed to anything" to avoid a charge of a demonic pact, punishable by a more severe fate, in a trial also laden with political stakes tied to Portuguese independence. The objection remains a serious one — a confession is not automatically proof — but it itself demands to be examined with the same rigor as positive cases, without hastily concluding to the authenticity of the case.

Hagiographic amplification: a serious and honest objection

The most frequent objection to levitation accounts is that of late hagiographic amplification: a modest or non-existent fact inflated by successive pious biographers. Far from shying away from it, Bouflet treats it as a historian: he observes that the accounts of levitations attributed to Bernard of Clairvaux, Saint Dominic, or Saint Ignatius of Loyola do not withstand the critical study of sources carried out by Olivier Leroy and himself. He points out a precise mechanism: some authors claim to hold the fact from an acquaintance of the saint, whereas this acquaintance mentions no levitation when he testifies under oath at the canonization process.^[66]

The case of Padre Pio illustrates the same mechanism in a more recent period:

"The phenomenon is reported in the life of the Capuchin saint only once, on the basis of hardly credible documents originating from a single witness; and the eminent expert — and friend — of Padre Pio, Ennemond Boniface, does not mention levitation in the rigorous study he devoted to the mystical phenomenology of the stigmatist. The account is copied almost word for word from a popular biography of Saint John Joseph of the Cross." — Joachim Bouflet^[67]

This objection provides a clear rule of hierarchy, already applied in this article: contemporary testimony under oath > late pious biography > rumour reported without a source. It is this same rule that leads to retaining Fournet, the Santinha d'Arrifana, or Garicoïts, and not to retaining the levitation of Padre Pio or Marthe Robin as established cases.

Counter-levitation: an inverse phenomenon, not to be confused

In the ecstasies of the Passion, some mystics become, on the contrary, impossible to lift — an inverse phenomenon that Bouflet calls "counter-levitation" and which he carefully distinguishes from levitation properly speaking. He sets aside accounts that are too vague and retains those files where precise witnesses describe a concrete attempt and its failure:

"Dr Azevedo once invited a priest present to lift Alexandrina from the paving stones: at that very moment, she was reliving Christ's ascent to Calvary, with the cross on his shoulders. The priest, a very robust man, took her under the armpits, but all his efforts were in vain. He murmured: 'With all my strength put into it, I cannot do it!'" — Testimony concerning Blessed Alexandrina Maria da Costa^[68]

This anticipated objection answers in advance an easy criticism: any muscular rigidity or loss of consciousness could, in theory, weigh down a fainting body. But Bouflet explicitly distinguishes precise testimonies — an identified attempt, a noted failure, a context of the Passion — from second-hand accounts, and recalls that a person who is merely unconscious does not, by that very fact, become impossible for a robust man to lift.

Can the phenomenon be locked into fixed laws?

In 1928, Olivier Leroy had proposed four generalizations about levitation: an always slight lifting (about 50 cm), an always gradual ascent and descent, a maximum duration of fifteen to twenty minutes, and the obligatory retention of the initial position. The examination of the files leads Bouflet to challenge each of these four "laws", with examples to support him — just as he challenges the supposed incompatibility between stigmata and levitation.^[69] Fournet's case exceeds the twenty-minute duration; that of Edvige Carboni far exceeds 50 centimetres; that of Francisca Cirer documents three different postures in the same person. This diversity does not invalidate the phenomenon: it invalidates only the claim to overly rigid laws — exactly the conclusion that the descriptive typology presented above had already announced.

A personal critical grid, not a verdict of the Church

Bouflet established, as an appendix to his Encyclopédie, a rating grid from 0 to 5 for sixty-one cases from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, according to the frequency, multiplicity, objectivity, and proximity of the available testimonies:

"The highest rating reflecting facts observed indisputably and frequently, by multiple witnesses, in the best conditions; the lowest rating sanctioning examples that are poorly and/or wrongly attested." — Joachim Bouflet, Encyclopédie des phénomènes extraordinaires dans la vie mystique, volume 1^[70]

Receiving the maximum rating (5) in particular are Vincenzo Pallotti, Joaquina de Vedruna, Francisca Ana Cirer Carbonell, Michel Garicoïts, Ana de Jesus Magalhães, Maria Giuseppina Catanea, and Maria Concetta Pantusa; a rating of 4 to 5 for Fournet, Cottolengo, Domenica Barbagli, and Marie de Jésus du Bourg. Padre Pio, Marthe Robin, and several modern visionaries receive only a rating of 0 to 1 there. This grid must be presented for what it is: the personal critical evaluation of a historian, dated to 2001, and not an official ranking of the Catholic Church, which never carries out this type of quantitative rating.

Unexplained is not yet recognized: the three stages of discernment

A physically unexplained fact never, by itself alone, equals a recognized miracle. Bouflet formulates this distinction with a methodological clarity that applies exactly to levitations:

"It belongs to the ecclesiastical authority alone to define and recognize the miraculous character of a sign, the medical and scientific bodies being empowered simply to check and attest its naturally inexplicable character. When the Church denies any miraculous character to a prodigy, and therefore any supernatural origin, this does not necessarily imply that the fact is explicable a priori by natural causes alone." — Joachim Bouflet, Encyclopédie des phénomènes extraordinaires dans la vie mystique, volume 1^[71]

He adds, in the general conclusion of the same work, a formulation that applies just as much to levitations as to all the extraordinary phenomena he studied:

"As soon as medical science declares itself powerless, in the present state of its knowledge, to determine the causes and mechanisms of certain prodigies [...], and it renounces giving them a natural explanation, the Church takes into account — without systematically crying miracle — these unusual manifestations and strives to find a meaning for them, a spiritual understanding. Such is its line of conduct regarding extraordinary phenomena in mystical life." — Joachim Bouflet^[72]

Three distinct stages thus emerge for any levitation file: establishing the suspension (witnesses, tactile contact, measurement); excluding fraud and known natural causes (support, illusion, jump, amplification); discerning the origin and meaning (supernatural, preternatural, or simply unexplained). This last stage belongs to the Church alone, never to science nor to the historian.

The role of the Church in discernment

The Church does not officially declare that a saint levitated. She canonizes saints whose virtuous life has been verified and whose miracles attributed to their intercession have been examined. The extraordinary phenomena of a saint's life — including levitations — enter into the instruction of the cause but do not condition canonization.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church recalls on this subject that extraordinary charisms are ordered to the good of the Church and subject to the pastors:

"Whether extraordinary or simple and humble, charismatic graces are gifts of the Holy Spirit which, directly or indirectly, benefit the Church, for its building up, the good of men, and the needs of the world." — Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 799^[73]

The same Catechism distinguishes the universal call to mystical union and the rarity of extraordinary phenomena:

"God calls all men to this intimate union with him, although special graces or the extraordinary signs of this mystical life are granted only to some to manifest the free gift given to all." — Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2014^[74]

Authentic levitation, if it exists, is thus a sign that God freely grants to a few for his own glory — not an instrument at the saint's disposal, nor a mark of spiritual superiority.

A sign endured, not sought

The most constant datum across all the great dossiers of Catholic levitation is that the saint does not seek the phenomenon. On the contrary, he endures it, dreads it, tries to resist it, and feels ashamed of it. Thérèse of Avila prays for it to stop. Joseph of Cupertino is isolated and moved precisely because of the crowds his ecstasies draw. Alphonsus Liguori does not put himself on display. Maria de Mattias (1805-1866), foundress of the Adorers of the Precious Blood, canonized in 2003, illustrates the same reflex of concealment: she « would try to hide as soon as she felt the phenomenon beginning, but God was often quicker than she was ».^[75]

This constant is spiritually significant. It radically distinguishes the Catholic phenomenon from the performances of false mystics who seek to impress, and it confirms the inner logic of Christian mysticism: holiness comes from self-dispossession, not from the acquisition of powers.

« These effects are great. We know that such graces can come only from him, that he is the master of our body as well as of our soul, and that we can do nothing of ourselves; which imprints on our mind a great humility. » — Saint Thérèse of Avila, The Book of Her Life, ch. XX^[76]

Obedience at the heart of authenticity

In the best dossiers, levitation is accompanied by total submission to ecclesiastical authority. Joseph of Cupertino accepts without resistance the transfers, the restrictions, the isolation ordered by his superiors and the Holy Office. Thérèse of Avila submits every phenomenon of her mystical life to her confessors. Eusebia Palomino, brought back to herself by the voice of her superior, begs that no one be told about it. In Catholic logic, this obedience is the true sign of discernment: a phenomenon that leads to pride, disobedience, or self-display is suspect by definition.

Garrigou-Lagrange states it precisely: extraordinary phenomena belong to an order inferior to the mystical life properly so called, which is a matter between the soul and God in the depths of the spirit. Levitation, if it occurs, is a bodily reflection of interiority; it is not interiority itself.^[77]

« One must clearly distinguish the mystical life as such, which is intimate union with God in the ways of perfection, from the extraordinary phenomena that may accompany it but are not essential to it. » — R. Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., The Three Ages of the Interior Life, vol. II^[78]

Faith does not depend on prodigies

The warning of John of the Cross remains fundamental: the soul that grows in faith and charity must learn to do without sensible consolations and external signs. Levitations, even authentic ones, are not proof of God's existence nor a foundation of faith. At most they are a sign — fragile, debatable, never decisive.

The right Catholic attitude is summed up by Thurston himself, who is not a naive apologist but a rigorous historian:

« The real question is not "is it physically possible?", but "do we have testimony good enough to affirm that it happened?" »^[79]

Neither laugh too quickly, nor believe too quickly. Examine the dossiers with the tools of history, consider the quality of the witnesses, assess the coherence of the accounts, and remember that the Church herself, who keeps the memory of these phenomena, has never placed them at the centre of her proclamation of the Gospel.

• The levitations of Saint Joseph of Cupertino (1603-1663) — the most massive dossier of the Catholic tradition, with testimonies, ecclesiastical reaction and spiritual meaning.
• Faverney (1608) — the best-documented case of Eucharistic levitation recognized by Rome.
• Lourdes (1999) — a controversial video case and the lessons of modern discernment.
• Garabandal (1961-1965) — the complete dossier of the apparitions, of which the levitation of Conchita González is only one of the extraordinary phenomena.
• Eucharistic miracles — categories of phenomena associated with the Eucharist.
• Discernment of supernatural phenomena — the Catholic method of evaluation.
• Other mystical phenomena — a panorama of extraordinary bodily phenomena (inedia, bilocation, stigmata, incorruptibility).
• Incorruptible bodies — another category of objective phenomena studied by Bouflet, not to be confused with levitation.