The Virgin Weeps?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Or maybe not says Pope Francis.

Virgin Mary apparitions ‘not always real’, says Pope after statue row

Apparitions of the Virgin Mary are “not always real”, Pope Francis has said, in what appears to be an indirect reference to a woman who drew thousands of pilgrims to a town near Rome to pray before a statue that she claimed shed tears of blood.

“Don’t look there,” the pontiff said during an interview with Rai 1 on Sunday when asked about apparitions of the Virgin Mary. “There are images of the Madonna that are real, but the Madonna has never drawn [attention] to herself,” he said. “I like to see her with her finger pointing up to Jesus. When Marian devotion is too self-centred, it’s not good. Both in the devotion and in the people who carry it forward.”

Creeping up on reality one small step at a time.

(Pigs' blood, apparently.)

 

[theprestige]

Creeping up on reality one small step at a time. : hit :

I thought the Catholic Church has always reserved the option of investigating such claims, and has always been on guard against fraudulent claims. The issue has always been one of balancing popular enthusiasm for alleged apparitions, and "realpolitik" about acknowledging and endorsing them.

I don't think this is a step towards reality. I think it's just the Vatican triangulating on an official opinion about this particular apparition.

 

[GDon]

I thought the Catholic Church has always reserved the option of investigating such claims, and has always been on guard against fraudulent claims. The issue has always been one of balancing popular enthusiasm for alleged apparitions, and "realpolitik" about acknowledging and endorsing them.

It's where the expression "devil's advocate" comes from. From Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil's_advocate

The advocatus diaboli (Latin for Devil's advocate) is a former official position within the Catholic Church, the Promoter of the Faith: one who "argued against the canonization(sainthood) of a candidate in order to uncover any character flaws or misrepresentation of the evidence favoring canonization"...

During the canonization process employed by the Catholic Church, the 'Promoter of the Faith' (Latin: promotor fidei), popularly known as the Devil's advocate (advocatus diaboli), was a canon lawyer appointed by Church authorities to argue against the canonization of a candidate.[4] It was this person's job to take a skeptical view of the candidate's character, to look for holes in the evidence, to argue that any miracles attributed to the candidate were fraudulent, and so on...

The office was established in 1587 during the reign of Pope Sixtus V.​

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

It's where the expression "devil's advocate" comes from. From Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil's_advocate

The advocatus diaboli (Latin for Devil's advocate) is a former official position within the Catholic Church, the Promoter of the Faith: one who "argued against the canonization(sainthood) of a candidate in order to uncover any character flaws or misrepresentation of the evidence favoring canonization"...

During the canonization process employed by the Catholic Church, the 'Promoter of the Faith' (Latin: promotor fidei), popularly known as the Devil's advocate (advocatus diaboli), was a canon lawyer appointed by Church authorities to argue against the canonization of a candidate.[4] It was this person's job to take a skeptical view of the candidate's character, to look for holes in the evidence, to argue that any miracles attributed to the candidate were fraudulent, and so on...

The office was established in 1587 during the reign of Pope Sixtus V.​

And yet the hypocritical, lying, fraud "Mother " Teresa was still canonized.

Possibly because:
Devil’s advocate used to be an actual job within the Catholic Church

Centuries ago, Devil’s advocate was an actual job within the administration of the Roman Catholic Church. Whenever the Church considered declaring somebody a saint, the Devil’s advocate — also known as the advocatus diaboli or the Promotere Fidei (Latin for “promoter of the faith”) — would argue against the candidate’s nomination.

The Devil’s advocate diminished

The Devil’s advocate was part of the Roman Catholic Church for more than 400 years, until John Paul II greatly reduced the profession’s powers in 1983. Why he did this, no one knows for certain. What we do know is that this action has greatly increased the speed at which the canonization process takes place, and that it gave the figure of the pope greater control.

There's progress for you.

 

[TragicMonkey]

And yet the hypocritical, lying, fraud "Mother " Teresa was still canonized.

Edina Monsoon voice: That's P.R., sweetie, darling.

 

[8enotto]

In Mexico the Maria is a popular figure among the faithful. So much that she has a day of celebration in December.
The monument my family made has one dedicated to the San Juan vision of her during the 1500s in Mexico.

My MIL was a big believer and a shrine stands next to our home , stained glass window and all.

There are several more apparitions of her regionally here, at least four ancient statues that weep, move or something as seen by someone now long dead.
I have seen two of the weeping ones in my travels and none winked at me. Quite artistic wood sculpture and well preserved for being 500 years old, but no magic for me.

Then the wax life sized Jesus in a glass Spanish style coffin in Taxco that has turned his head towards pilgrims as they prayed....
Yeah, it's amazing art in an amazing 500 year old building but again no magic for anyone in the last two centuries.

It's all fairly harmless and gives the faithful something to do. But beyond local legend and tourist reasons there isn't much substance behind it all.

 

[dann]

I though this would be a thread about incels ...

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I thought the Catholic Church has always reserved the option of investigating such claims, and has always been on guard against fraudulent claims. The issue has always been one of balancing popular enthusiasm for alleged apparitions, and "realpolitik" about acknowledging and endorsing them.

I don't think this is a step towards reality. I think it's just the Vatican triangulating on an official opinion about this particular apparition.

When I was a young Catholic, I couldn't really wrap my mind around this. Catholicism makes a lot out of faith, believing in God despite lack of any real evidence.

Having the Holy Mother come tapdancing out from behind the bushes always struck me as a repudiation of the whole idea of faith. Faith doesn't exist if you are personally witnessing evidence of the existence of divine beings.

Anyway, I tend to agree with your view that recognizing miracles is more about practicality than any serious thinking about theology. I would assume that any modern day miracles are going to have a much, much harder time sufficiently proving to the Vatican they aren't either hoaxes or mental illness compared to some of the legacy miracles from less sophisticated times.

That makes the issue of sainthood much tougher, because bonafide miracles are a part of the process of saints being declared. Tough spot for the church which would probably like to lift up more modern role models for the church, but have to deal with the outdated "miracle" system to make it happen.

 

[dann]

Faith doesn't exist if you are personally witnessing evidence of the existence of divine beings.

Beware of that one! I heard the same one in (allegedly secularized, but actually Protestant) school. It's the religious argument against demanding to see evidence:
'If you want proof, you are not a good Christian. A good Christian would never stoop so low.'

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

In Mexico the Maria is a popular figure among the faithful. So much that she has a day of celebration in December.
The monument my family made has one dedicated to the San Juan vision of her during the 1500s in Mexico.

My MIL was a big believer and a shrine stands next to our home , stained glass window and all.

There are several more apparitions of her regionally here, at least four ancient statues that weep, move or something as seen by someone now long dead.
I have seen two of the weeping ones in my travels and none winked at me. Quite artistic wood sculpture and well preserved for being 500 years old, but no magic for me.

Then the wax life sized Jesus in a glass Spanish style coffin in Taxco that has turned his head towards pilgrims as they prayed....
Yeah, it's amazing art in an amazing 500 year old building but again no magic for anyone in the last two centuries.

It's all fairly harmless and gives the faithful something to do. But beyond local legend and tourist reasons there isn't much substance behind it all.

Mary worship is huge across the catholic world, mainly because she's the only non-evil god within christianity. For example Knock is a major catholic pilgrimage site despite it being two boys messing around with a statue and a lantern to create shadow puppets.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Anyway, I tend to agree with your view that recognizing miracles is more about practicality than any serious thinking about theology. I would assume that any modern day miracles are going to have a much, much harder time sufficiently proving to the Vatican they aren't either hoaxes or mental illness compared to some of the legacy miracles from less sophisticated times.

That makes the issue of sainthood much tougher, because bonafide miracles are a part of the process of saints being declared. Tough spot for the church which would probably like to lift up more modern role models for the church, but have to deal with the outdated "miracle" system to make it happen.

No they'll do whatever they want that they think will help them - a great example is "no married priests" - unless you are converting from the CofE and then we'll just ignore that "rule". There isn't any rigorous checking of miracles despite what they say. As we all know if there was there would be no new saints.

Smoke and mirrors.

 

[Darat]

Mary worship is huge across the catholic world, mainly because she's the only non-evil god within christianity. For example Knock is a major catholic pilgrimage site despite it being two boys messing around with a statue and a lantern to create shadow puppets.

It sneaks into the protestant world as well - even with their "no graven idol"
commandment. One that is of course omitted from the RCC version, commandments seem to be rather "pick n' mix" for Christians.

 

[8enotto]

The fundy cult my father bit into went as far as no idols, and only one symbol . The cross on the front of a Bible.
They had no dedicated church but used auditorium buildings with minimalist decor.
Then he married a catholic . Statues of saints everywhere, big churches richly decorated and all the trappings the faithful made to show thier faith.
In the US it was conservative Mary recognition as she had played a vital role in the myths, but they always warned us against worshipping her. We could pray to her for help. The British sects had a lot of influence here.

In Mexico it is straight up Mary worship. As taken from Spanish version of the lore and adapted to Aztec beliefs. Saints came in handy to replace minor gods of the pantheon as the big guy absorbed the main characters.

It's a wonderful mess, very regional at best.

 

[dann]

Saints came in handy to replace minor gods of the pantheon as the big guy absorbed the main characters.

Same as in Cuba with the Orishas in Santeria.