this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
57 points (98.3% liked)

Skeptic

1412 readers
5 users here now

A community for Scientific Skepticism:

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism, sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.

Do not confuse this with General Skepticism, Philosophical Skepticism, or Denialism.

Things we like:

Things we don't like:

Other communities of interest:

"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence." -David Hume

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
acosmichippo
kabe
57
The Vatican declares that it can no longer confirm the supernatural... but you can worship it anyway. (apnews.com)
submitted 9 months ago by FlyingSquid to c/skeptic
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The new norms reframe the Catholic Church’s evaluation process by essentially taking off the table whether church authorities will declare a particular vision, stigmata or other seemingly divinely inspired event supernatural.

Instead, the new criteria envisages six main outcomes, with the most favorable being that the church issues a noncommittal doctrinal green light, a so-called “nihil obstat.” Such a declaration means there is nothing about the event that is contrary to the faith, and therefore Catholics can express devotion to it.

...

The norms also allow that an event might at some point be declared “supernatural,” and that the pope can intervene in the process. But “as a rule,” the church is no longer in the business of authenticating inexplicable events or making definitive decisions about their supernatural origin.

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FauxPseudo 24 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Never thought I'd see the day when the Vatican would take a "We can't prove anything is supernatural" position. This is a big day for skepticism.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

If I'm reading it correctly, they realized that with smartphones and the internet any/everyone can plainly see these miracles are fake, so they're proactively sidestepping the entire thing.

[–] FlyingSquid 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It is in the sense that they're not actively promoting the supernatural, but this wishy-washy approach where they say you can still believe in it if you want to and there's nothing wrong with venerating supernatural things we can't confirm to be real is not as helpful as it could be.

[–] FauxPseudo 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

For a 2000 year old institution this is a big move. I'll take any win I can get out of them.

[–] FlyingSquid 7 points 9 months ago

You're right. I shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

I'm also glad to let the Roman Catholic Church render itself obsolete and irrelevant. The participation of the USCCB in the Christian nationalist movement, and the Catholic Federalist Society wing of SCOTUS is going to cause a heavy backlash against the entire church, including the Holy See if it continues to push dogma-driven doctrine and further strip civil rights.

It's really time for religious institutions to resign from their position as the second estate.

[–] ScruffyDucky 2 points 9 months ago

I'm not so sure

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Aren't miracles "supernatural"? Don't people need 2 "confirmed" miracles to be considered for sainthood?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Yes. And hagiography deals in manufacturing a myth by asserting it cannot be disproven with available data.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

So are they going as far as to say the Resurrection of Jesus was likely to be ahistorical?

We're used to a post-Newtonian world being free of ghosts, fairies and divine intervention. But recognizing that their own origins are mythical would be a significant step.

It's as much admitted to seminaries, just not to the laity.