Help Aleteia continue its mission by making a tax-deductible donation. In this way, Aleteia's future will be yours as well.
*Your donation is tax deductible!
Almost 50 years after the last promulgation of norms for studying supernatural phenomena in the Catholic Church (apparitions, revelations, etc.), on May 17, 2024, the Vatican published new rules to avoid scandals and confusion among the faithful.
The 15-page document is signed by the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez. It gives bishops worldwide a strict procedure for discerning mystical phenomena occurring in their dioceses. Bishops are required to submit their opinions to Rome, which the Vatican must then validate. Unless the pope intervenes, the Catholic Church will never recognize the supernatural nature of a phenomenon, but can simply grant a Nihil obstat.
Why is the Church changing its norms?
The previous Norms Regarding the Manner of Proceeding in the Discernment of Presumed Apparitions or Revelations, Cardinal Fernandez reminds us in his introduction, date back to 1978 — approved by Paul VI — and were only made public in 2011. This old procedure, which did not call for any public statement from the Holy See, often left the faithful confused and bishops “without clear orientation,” he explains.
The Argentine prefect also points his finger at the problematic slowness of procedures, admitting that “ecclesial discernment often came too late.” He refers to the fact that only six cases have been “officially resolved” since 1950.
The spread of information on these phenomena, notes Cardinal Fernandez, is amplified today by the advent of modern means of communication, requiring additional attention to prevent the dangers that can arise.
As a result, he notes the need for procedures capable of involving several dioceses, noting that these phenomena tend to cross borders.
Protecting the faithful
These changes, the cardinal hopes, will make it easier to combat some of the “serious critical issues” that have arisen. In particular, he targets cases where “apparitions” or “revelations” may have been used to obtain “profit, power, fame, social recognition, or other personal interest.” He also cites cases where phenomena are a “means of or pretext for exerting control over people or carrying out abuses.”
The Argentine cardinal also warns against “revelations” containing “doctrinal errors” or spreading a “sectarian mentality.” Lastly, he refers to phenomena that have proved to be the fruit of someone’s “inclination toward lying” or tendency to “fabricate falsehoods (mythomania).”
Even in cases where there is not a problematic motive, apparitions are only considered private revelation.
The faithful do “not have to accept the authenticity of these events,” the cardinal adds, lamenting that existing procedures have sometimes suggested otherwise. He explains that “Revelation” — the truth revealed in Jesus and transmitted in the Gospels — is “definitive” and therefore does not need to be supplemented by revelations.
Detailed procedure
The Holy See gives bishops a detailed procedure to follow. The bishop of each diocese is responsible for examining cases of alleged supernatural phenomena in his territory. He is asked “to avoid fueling a sensationalistic climate,” to avoid “uncontrolled or dubious displays of devotion,” and to refrain “from making any public statement.”
If the phenomenon remains circumscribed, the bishop has the duty of “vigilance.” If “forms of devotion emerge,” the bishop must initiate a canonical investigation, setting up an investigatory commission made up of at least one theologian, one canonist, and one expert. Rome insists on their impartiality and the confidentiality of the investigation.
In addition to questioning witnesses to these phenomena, any objects involved — lacrimations of sacred images, sweating, bleeding, visible transformation of consecrated hosts, etc. — must be subjected to laboratory tests.
Specific criteria
The Holy See provides positive and negative discernment criteria for assessing phenomena. The four “positive” points to be considered are “the credibility and good reputation of the persons” concerned, “the doctrinal orthodoxy” of the phenomenon and accompanying messages, “the unpredictable nature” of the phenomenon (proving it is not the “result of the initiative of the people involved”), and its “fruits of the Christian life.”
The six negative points to look for are “a manifest error about the event,” “doctrinal errors,” the finding of a “sectarian spirit,” a “pursuit of profit, power, fame, social recognition, or other personal interest closely linked to the event,” “gravely immoral actions committed by the subject or the subject’s followers at or around the time of the event,” and lastly “psychological alterations or psychopathic tendencies in the person, [… ] any psychosis, collective hysteria, and other elements traceable to a pathological context.”
At the end of the preliminary investigation, the bishop is to draw up a report with a personal opinion and forward all the acts and his judgment to the dicastery. It’s up to Rome to give a “final judgment,” insists the document, which stipulates that the DDF “reserves the right to intervene again depending on the development of the phenomenon in question.”
Finally, the bishop is to make public the dicastery’s response, specifying “through a decree, the nature of the authorization and the limits of any permitted veneration.” He then continues to monitor the phenomenon “with prudent attention.” And if he finds “a deliberate intent to bewilder and deceive others for ulterior motives,” the bishop may even apply canonical sanctions.
Rome’s scale for evaluating supernatural phenomena
Following the bishop’s investigation, he sends to Rome his determination on the phenomenon under study. Six different formulas are offered to the bishop, on a scale ranging from “Nihil obstat” to a declaration of being “not supernatural.” At the Vatican, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith re-examines the entire dossier and proceeds “to confirm or not confirm the determination proposed by the bishop.” Here are the six possible conclusions:
Nihil obstat. This is the highest positive degree on the scale of discernment of supernatural phenomena. But the Vatican remains cautious, “without expressing any certainty about the supernatural authenticity of the phenomenon itself,” it states at the outset. Rome recognizes “many signs of the action of the Holy Spirit” and that “no aspects that are particularly critical or risky have been detected,” continues the note, which takes care to add: “at least so far.” With the Nihil obstat, the bishop can promote the spiritual proposal while remaining attentive to further developments.
Prae oculis habeatur. With this response, Rome acknowledges “important positive signs” in the phenomenon, but also notes “aspects of confusion or potential risks.” “Careful discernment” and dialogue between the bishop and the “recipients” of the “spiritual experience” are required. A “doctrinal clarification” may be necessary if there have been messages.
Curatur. The dicastery has noted several significant negative elements but “at the same time, the phenomenon has already spread widely, and there are verifiable spiritual fruits.” “A ban that could upset the People of God is not recommended,” explains the note, which invites the bishop not to “encourage this phenomenon,” to “seek out alternative expressions of devotion,” and possibly to “reorient its spiritual and pastoral aspects.”
Sub mandato. In this category, Rome is not challenging the phenomenon itself, but “a person, a family, or a group of people who are misusing it” and, for example, derive “financial gain” from it. In such cases, management of the “specific place where the phenomenon is occurring” is entrusted to the bishop or a person delegated by the Holy See.
Prohibetur et obstruatur.“Critical issues and risks […] appear to be very serious.” To avoid any confusion or scandal, “the Dicastery asks the Diocesan Bishop to declare publicly that adherence to this phenomenon is not allowed,” to explain the reasons to the faithful who are affected, and to “reorient” their spiritual concerns.
Declaratio de non supernaturalitate. Rome authorizes the bishop to declare that the phenomenon is recognized as “not supernatural.” The decision is made on the basis of evidence. For example, the note explains, when an “alleged visionary admits to having lied, or if credible witnesses provide elements of proof” that make it possible to verify that the phenomenon is the result of “fabrication, an erroneous intention, or mythomania.”
From now on, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith can take it upon itself to study a case. The pope is the only person who can exceptionally authorize the declaration of the supernatural nature of an event.
And today we celebrate...