New Norms for the Discernment of Apparitions and Private Revelations (2)

Supernatural Phenomena Subject to the Church?

Another element casts doubt on the real intentions of the new norms. It is pointed out on May 9 on katholisches.info by Giuseppe Nardi, who, before the publication of the Roman document, already feared the spirit in which the examination of supernatural phenomena would now be conducted: “A new criterion would be to know if the ‘messages’ contain scenarios of the end of the world or apocalyptic declarations.

“[Indeed,] Franciscan Father Stefano Cecchin, President of the International Pontifical Marian Academy, caused a sensation a year ago when he stated, in an interview with Alfa y Omega, that the apparitions which speak of chastisements ‘are absolutely false’. He thus delegitimized, certainly unintentionally, Fatima and La Salette, to name only two of the most well-known recognized Marian apparitions.

“In plain language [according to Fr. Cecchin]: if it is a question of warnings from Heaven, chastisements, and ruin, in relation to phenomena of apparition, it is appropriate to act with redoubled prudence and restraint. Moreover: these are in some way privileged candidates for immediate elimination.”

And he recalls: “On June 17, 2023, Fr. Cecchin said even more clearly to Avvenire, the daily newspaper of Italian bishops, what seems to be one of the motivations of the ‘tightening of the screws’: ‘Why do people today want to undermine the authority of the Pope, the Church, civil institutions?

“’Mary is the bearer of peace, she comes to lead us to encounter God because God loves me, she sacrifices her Son for sinners, not to chastise the world’. Katholisches.info thus asked, on June 23, 2023, if Rome was preparing a cancel culture against Mary?”

Giuseppe Nardi noted that Fr. Cecchin’s presence at the press conference presenting the document had not been anticipated. Was he working behind the scenes? Or had he been forgotten? In any case, time will tell whether his spirit hovers over the next investigations conducted according to the new norms.

A Demythologization Inspired by Protestantism

On May 30, in La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, Stefano Fontana considers that the new norms are in no way the fruit of spontaneous generation: “The recent norms refusing to pronounce on the supernatural do not come out of nowhere. The paths that paved the way start from the Protestant theology of demystification [demythologization], which aims to rationalize faith by eliminating miracles from the Gospel stories.

“In the recent document dictating new norms on Marian apparitions, the Church excludes declaring their supernatural character. [...] The Church will be able to pronounce only on the historically visible effects, but not on the supernatural event itself. Moreover, she will do that in a historical way—that is to say, with the possibility of reformulating the evaluation on the basis of ‘the history of the effects’.”

The Italian academic recalls: “We do not arrive at such turning points overnight. Which paths of contemporary theology have paved the way for the substantial change of course on apparitions? First of all, the theology of ‘demythologization’, a process that has had several versions, with very different emphases between the various authors.

“But which has demonstrated a strongly unified hold, together with its genesis in Protestant theology, which, as we know, has strongly influenced Catholic theology. Indeed, it can certainly be said that the Fernández’ turning point on the impossibility of declaring supernaturality is of Protestant origin.”

And he gives an explanation for this change: “The main reason for these new paths is the hypothesis that mythical and metaphysical languages are incomprehensible to modern man, who would have an empirical language, as Paul van Buren writes [Editor’s note: 1924-1998. American theologian, Episcopalian, defining himself as a representative of ‘secular Christianity’.].” 

“This is why we should speak of Jesus with the same words that we use when we speak of other men, in order to make Jesus comprehensible to the man of today, we should speak of the story of Jesus as a man. And transcendent phenomena must be reduced to human meanings.”

Which, according to Stefano Fontana, leads to the following effects in preaching: “The transition from the theology of the dogmatic method to that of the critical historical method and to the hermeneutic method implies taking as the criterion of the truth of the revelation its comprehensibility and its usefulness for the man of today.

“’Casting out demons’ will thus mean fighting against injustice, ‘speaking in new tongues’ will be understood as expressing oneself in a simple way so that everyone understands, ‘laying hands on the sick and healing them’ will be understood as applying the WHO health regulations for pandemics. The method applied to transcendence will be the same as that used for historical phenomena. Hence the new approach regarding the evaluation of apparitions.”

As Luisella Scrosatti remarked in La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana [Daily Compass] on May 23, such a position gives rise to a contradiction: “the denial that the Church has the means to be able to bring to bear on an event a judgement of probability or moral certainty regarding its supernatural origin; but how can we give credence to the Church that proclaims the miracle of the healing of the hydropic man by the Lord, or of the cripple by Peter and John, if that same Church today tells us that in essence it is not possible to say anything about the supernaturalness of an event?”

A Prelate with an Unrefined Vocabulary

To finish, it is worth considering the remarks made at the press conference presenting the new norms. Here the form illuminates the substance. As Nico Spuntoni brings up in La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana on May 20, Cardinal Fernández spoke of the alleged recipient of supernatural phenomena in terms far removed from the style of the Curia. In the Vatican News coverage of the event, the cardinal answers a journalist’s question, saying, “If he does not live in sanctifying grace, it is easier for him to get into ******** [fare cazzate]’ [sic].”

And this is not a verbal slipup—Nico Spuntoni recalls this other fact: “Four months ago, on Christmas Eve, already a cardinal and guardian of Catholic orthodoxy, Fernández greeted the community of Alcira Gigena, where he was born, with a homily in which he described his home town as ‘city of ****’. A formula, which he found nice, to glorify himself by emphasizing to his fellow citizens that even a native of Alcira Gigena can rise very high. Exactly as happened to him.”

And Nico Spuntoni concludes: “Cardinal Fernández almost seems to have an ostentatious desire to use swear words. Spontaneity or a crude attempt to present himself as an hombre del pueblo [man of the people] at all costs?”

These semantic remarks may be considered of little importance. The fact remains that the vocabulary of the current Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith shows a tendency that is more scatological than eschatological.