Real-Life X-Files: Investigating the Paranormal

36. Adventure of the Weeping Icon

~ Chapter 36 AdVe_~t1~re of t!le ~~!eeui_~&': Ico~ " ~ On Tuesday, September 3, 1996, at the request of The Toronto Sun, I headed to Canada to investigate the world's latest "weeping icon." I was to meet with reporters at the newspaper's King Street offices and from there to be escorted to a Greek Orthodox Church in Toronto's East York district. Church officials had promised the Sun they could examine the icon at 11:00 P.M., and I was enlisted for that purpose. In addition to myovernight bag, I also packed a "weeping icon kit" consisting of a camera and close-up lenses, a stereomicroscope removed from its base, and various vials, pipettes, bibulous paper, and other collection materials. As we arrived in the neighborhood, however, I saw not the nearly deserted church I had expected to be awaiting our special appointment but rather traffic congestion and a line of pilgrims stretching far off into the night. I waited outside with my conspicuous case while reporters went to learn that the promise of an examination had been retracted. I determined to proceed anyway and do the best I could. A Sun reporter of Greek extraction feared I might start a riot, but his colleague, Scot Magnish, who had brought me there, was only concerned for my safety. (It was not wise for him to go inside, given rumored responses to his critical article on the phenomenon published in the latest edition ofthe newspaper.) After stuffing some essentials from my kit into my pockets, I handed Scot my case, turned, and bounded up the steps of the little church two at a time. Behind me, Sun photographer Craig Robertson rushed to keep up. We passed a lady who shouted the admission price ("two dollars fifty cents") at us; I shouted back, "Toronto Sun!" and kept going. Adventure of the Weeping Icon Figure 36.1. Author peers over shoulder of priest- once defrocked for working in an Athens brothel-as he illuminates a "weeping" icon at a Greek Orthodox church in Toronto. (Photo courtesy Toronto Srm ) Inside. the church was swelteringly hot. Nevertheless, people milled about for a time after viewing the controversial icon of the Madonna and Child, while new pilgrims passed before it. A table filled with candles and a crude sign, "PLEASE DO NOT TOUCH THE ICON OF VIRGIN MARY," kept the curious at bay. An attendant refused my request for a sample of the tears and pretended to ignore me when [ asked again in a louder voice. A hanging oil lamp partially obscured the face of the Madonna, but by moving my head from side to side and thus catching the light on the surface of the picture, I made several important discoveries. First, the icon was a fake- not an original wood-panel painting at an but merely a color photographic print. In addition, the "tears" did not emanate from the eyes but from somewhere ncar the top of the Virgin's head, and so by definition the image was not "weeping." Moreover, one of the four rivulets was smeared and from its appearance looked "suspiciously oily" (as I told the 5r/ll). 215 'V 216 "'I'f' Real-Life X-Files The latter point was quite significant since real tears, or even mere water, would quickly dry in the hot atmosphere of the church. But a nondrying oil (such as olive oil) would remain fresh and glistening indefinitely -just the trick for "weeping" icons and one apparently more commonly used than the hidden tubes and special chemicals so often proposed by theorists. During the quarter ofan hour or so that I observed the image, there was no fresh flow of"tears"-just the same unchanging rivulets I sawat the beginning. (Therewere also fine droplets between the streaks as ifspattered on, possiblyfrom the oil lamp that almost touched the print.) At length, I persuaded the priest, the Reverend Ieronimos Katseas, to provide a better view-at least for the photographer. Katseas pulled the lamp away with one hand while holding a candle close to the Madonna's face with the other. Photographer Robertson clicked away, producing the accompanying photograph. In the subsequent article by Magnish and two colleagues, I was quoted as saying that the phenomenon was"more carnival sideshowthan miracle" and that I was troubled by the withdrawal of the promise to allow the icon to be examined. "It would seem...