The Vatican is changing how it verifies miracles [CNA]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CNA_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CNA_News

Guest
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/i...redit_Martha_Calderon_CNA_10_18_15.jpgVatican City, Sep 23, 2016 / 11:03 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Changes to the regulations for confirming alleged miracles during the causes of saints aim to preserve the scientific rigor of the examination and maintain its distinction from matters of theology, it was announced Friday.

The changes, which were approved by Pope Francis Aug. 24, were announced by the Vatican Sept. 23. They concern the professional secrecy of the proceedings regarding presumed miracles and hold that a supermajority of two-thirds (five out of seven, or four out of six) of the votes from members of the Medical Board must be positive for the cause to continue to the next step.

Previously, only a simple majority of medical experts acknowleding a supernatural healing was required. The changes also stipulate that the medical experts will receive their remuneration only through bank transfer – not cash.

“The purpose of the Regulation can be none other than the good of the Causes, which can never neglect the historical and scientific truth of the alleged miracles,” Archbishop Marcello Bartolucci, Secretary of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, wrote regarding the changes. “Just as it is necessary for the legal checks to be complete, convergent and reliable, it is also necessary that their study be performed with serenity, objectivity and sure competence by highly specialised medical experts.”

“This Regulation obviously concerns only the good functioning of the Medical Board, whose task appears increasingly delicate, demanding and, thanks be to God, appreciated both inside and outside the Church.”

Archbishop Bartolucci added, “Always the Church is convinced that miracles of the saints is the ‘finger of God,’ which ratifies, so to say, the human judgement of their holiness of life.”

“This vision is part of the mind of the Church and has been repeatedly reaffirmed by the ordinary magisterium to the pronouncements of Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis. It is historically certain that miracles are always a decisive argument for the canonization of Servants of God,” he stated.

The new wording is based on the regulations approved by Blessed Paul VI in 1976. The drafting of the new regulations was done by a special commission which began its work in September 2015.

Besides the new requirements of a qualified majority and professional secrecy on the part of those involved, the president of the Medical Board is limited to one term and one reappointment (a total of 10 years in the position). Nor can a case be re-examined more than three times, and when a re-examination is made, there must be a nine persons on the Medical Board.

Also, it is now the Under-Secretary of the Council who will undertake the functions previously under the rapporteur, who had been responsible for reporting on the proceedings of the meetings.

In addition to the changes introduced, there were also adjustments made to procedural language.

Since the 12th and 13th centuries the Church has continually revised the regulations under which a miracle is confirmed in cases of causes for beatification or canonization. The 1917 Code of Canon Law established access of the miracle to theologians only after the alleged miracle had been studied and verified by two expert doctors, aside from issues of philosophical and religious consideration.

“And even today it is so: the scientific aspect remains distinct from the theological,” Archbishop Bartolucci affirmed.

“Miracles are not marginal events of the Gospel or the causes of saints. Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom of God in word and with ‘messianic signs,’ that he worked to make clear his identity and credibility to its mission and also to anticipate the final news of the redeemed world,” Archbishop Bartolucci said.

“The same is true for saints,” he said.

“Miracles, that they receive through their intercession, are a sign of God’s presence in history and, at the same time, are the confirmation of their former high holiness, expressed first of all in the exercise of heroic Christian virtues or martyrdom.”
Full article…
 
I’m not understanding what they are saying. Can someone paraphrase?
 
I’m not understanding what they are saying. Can someone paraphrase?
From what I’ve read the changes are basically to ward off corruption and ensure the Congregation is making good judgments about sainthood. For example, a simple majority only required 51% “yes” votes to pass, while now with a two-thirds majority it takes 67% “yes” votes to pass. It’s a harder test, so there is less chance of a divided Medical Board approving a false miracle.

In another change, the medical experts’ payments are now required to go through the bank, allowing the payments to be independently audited later on. Previously cash payments were allowed meaning bribes could have been made behind the scenes without anyone knowing.

On the president’s shorter term, this would prevent any one person from getting too powerful for too long. Before they could start to really wield a lot of influence over the board, they are replaced by someone else.

Re-examinations are similar to appeals in the American courts. There was no limit before, so a group supporting a particular saint’s cause could keep pushing for re-examinations until it was approved. Experts could get tired of examining the same miracle and just approved it to get it off their backs. The chances of that happening are lower with a re-examination limit.

I’m not sure about professional secrecy. Maybe this is about keeping the names of Medical Board experts secret, so that those wanting to intimidate the experts wouldn’t know who to pressure if they wanted to force a miracle to be approved.

Most of these potential corruption issues probably didn’t happen, but they could have under the old procedure. Now, it’s a little harder. There’s always going to be corruption, but better procedures can limit it. The downside to reducing corruption is that some legitimate saint causes could be rejected. Better safe than sorry I guess.
 
do they actually publish their research methods and results of any experiments conducted?
 
do they actually publish their research methods and results of any experiments conducted?
I don’t know. What I do know is that they do publish something like that when it’s Eucharistic miracles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top