# Yet another evil act of the Catholic Church **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 16, 2013, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338 "2013-01-16T00:27:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/41 "2013-01-16T17:33:34Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > I find it difficult to believe that a church that has miracle beliefs is somehow not promoting miracle beliefs by having miracle beliefs. The way not to promote miracle beliefs is not to have them. Otherwise, you’re just someone on a fad diet claiming that you’re a skeptic because you don’t believe in all fad diets. The more serious response is that the church certainly does believe in miracles and does nothing to discourage that belief. However, the church also recognizes the human impetus to declare all sorts of thing miraculous when they are nothing of the sort. Therefore, the church hierarchy has a tradition of putting barriers in the way of people who are proclaiming miracles. If an event or a phenomenon gets accepted as a miracle, it has to be outside normal experience and it cannot be the work of either an overly credulous person or a charlatan. Science, particularly medicine, probably has been cutting into miracles for 200 years and will continue to do so. Eventually, the only things that will be accepted as miracles will be odd events for which we have no explanation. (Such events are likely to continue to occur forever; whether they are miracles or simply unique phenomena will be the point of contention forever.) ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/42 "2013-01-16T17:43:37Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > The more serious response is that the church certainly does believe in miracles and does nothing to discourage that belief. However, the church also recognizes the human impetus to declare all sorts of thing miraculous when they are nothing of the sort. Therefore, the church hierarchy has a tradition of putting barriers in the way of people who are proclaiming miracles. If an event or a phenomenon gets accepted as a miracle, it has to be outside normal experience and it cannot be the work of either an overly credulous person or a charlatan. If an event or a phenomenon gets accepted as a miracle, it has to be the work of either overly credulous people or a charlatan. Yes, the church is more politically savvy than it once was (or rather, the politics have changed enough that they have to appear more choosy about the miracles they’ll accept). But that doesn’t actually equate to some sort of rigorous skepticism, just a CYA rejection of the more obvious fakes. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/43 "2013-01-16T18:12:09Z")
This reminds me of a Simpsons episode… ---
**Author:** ![Strinka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/strinka/32/512_2.png) [@Strinka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strinka)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/44 "2013-01-16T19:05:51Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > [California code mentions](http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=422.6-422.865)both actions AND threats as hate crime. And how is what Sanal Edamaruku did threatening? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/45 "2013-01-16T19:37:44Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > If an event or a phenomenon gets accepted as a miracle, it has to be the work of either overly credulous people or a charlatan. Yes, the church is more politically savvy than it once was (or rather, the politics have changed enough that they have to appear more choosy about the miracles they’ll accept). But that doesn’t actually equate to some sort of rigorous skepticism, just a CYA rejection of the more obvious fakes. Are you saying that there are never any spontaneous remissions of cancer? That no person has experienced a medical recovery against all the knowledge of every physician who treated him or her? You are free to chalk up all such events as “unknown” and believers are free to chalk up such events as “miraculous.” Portraying every person who puts forth a belief in miracles as “credulous” simply indicates your perspective on the topic (which is fine) without actually adding any information about the event. ---
**Author:** ![Troppus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a587f6/32.png) [@Troppus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troppus)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/46 "2013-01-16T19:45:26Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Are you saying that there are never any spontaneous remissions of cancer? That no person has experienced a medical recovery against all the knowledge of every physician who treated him or her? > You are free to chalk up all such events as “unknown” and believers are free to chalk up such events as “miraculous.” Portraying every person who puts forth a belief in miracles as “credulous” simply indicates your perspective on the topic (which is fine) without actually adding any information about the event. Spontaneous? You mean the work done by our bodys’ own defense and repair systems that goes on continuously and often without our notice? Macrophages, lymphocytes, leukocytes, and all the components of our immune system which serve to restore and repair our living cells and destroy, filter, and excrete damaged tissue and dead viruses, bacteria? The actors and agents at play are microscopic, but hardly “spontaneous”. ---
**Author:** ![Troppus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a587f6/32.png) [@Troppus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troppus)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/47 "2013-01-16T20:18:31Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Are you saying that there are never any spontaneous remissions of cancer? \ “Mechanisms proposed for spontaneous regression of human cancer include: immune mediation, tumor inhibition by growth factors and/or cytokines, induction of differentiation, hormonal mediation, elimination of a carcinogen, tumor necrosis and/or angiogenesis inhibition, psychologic factors, apoptosis and epigenetic mechanisms.” from the [National Institute of Health](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9891219) From [Dartmouth Medicine](http://dartmed.dartmouth.edu/spring09/html/disc_remission.php): “More than one in five invasive cancers detected in the study by mammography vanished without ever being treated.” A more digestible[Discover Magazine article](http://discovermagazine.com/2007/sep/the-body-can-stave-off-terminal-cancer-sometimes): “A subtype of T lymphocyte, known as a natural killer (NK) cell, patrols the body, attacking and killing viruses and cancer cells.” There is no need to credit Divine Intervention, Prayer, or any other woo for our body’s ability to detect and destroy rogue cells and infections. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/48 "2013-01-16T20:27:05Z")
Why anyone ever bothers to argue about Catholicism to Catholics is beyond me. If demonstrably batshit things like virgin birth, resurrection, transubstantiation or covering up for pedophiles won’t make them leave, there’s no getting through to them using reason. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/49 "2013-01-16T20:30:20Z")
> [@Troppus](#): > > There is no need to credit Divine Intervention, Prayer, or any other woo for our body’s ability to detect and destroy rogue cells and infections. And you can document that every single surprising remission was the result of these factors? And you can provide the exact reason why they occur in some cases and not in others? (If one in five occurrences heal themselves, why not five in five? And if a second event in five occurs, do you have the exact reason?) I have made no claim that we have a need to attribute such events to divine intervention. I have not even made a claim that calling people who do attribute such events to divine intervention “credulous” is wrong. I merely pointed out that calling them credulous indicates one’s position in a discussion without actually bringing more facts to the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/50 "2013-01-16T20:32:19Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > Why anyone ever bothers to argue about Catholicism to Catholics is beyond me. If demonstrably batshit things like virgin birth, resurrection, transubstantiation or covering up for pedophiles won’t make them leave, there’s no getting through to them using reason. I am unaware of any way to demonstrate that transubstantiation is not happening – it’s a claim that is unfalsifiable. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/51 "2013-01-16T20:37:20Z")
I’m unaware of any way to prove I’m not eating the soul of my dead grandfather every time I have a burrito - just because it’s unfalsifiable doesn’t make it any less crazy. ---
**Author:** ![Troppus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a587f6/32.png) [@Troppus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troppus)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/52 "2013-01-16T20:55:40Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > And you can document that every single surprising remission was the result of these factors? > And you can provide the exact reason why they occur in some cases and not in others? (If one in five occurrences heal themselves, why not five in five? And if a second event in five occurs, do you have the exact reason?) > > I have made no claim that we have a need to attribute such events to divine intervention. I have not even made a claim that calling people who do attribute such events to divine intervention “credulous” is wrong. I merely pointed out that calling them credulous indicates one’s position in a discussion without actually bringing more facts to the discussion. In many cases the exact reason is very clear; just as it is when cuts heal themselves, colds and flus resolve, bruises fade, etc. It’s not surprising, and hasn’t been mysterious for years. Our bodies’ healing and restorative functions are powerful and complex, but the evidence as to how these mechanisms work is accessible. How often do we seek to prove that the claimants were even afflicted? Do we ask them to produce medical records and other evidence they were actually suffering from the affliction they proclaim has been miraculously healed? Anyone who buys claims of the miraculous without demanding, examining, and vetting evidence is indeed: credulous. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/53 "2013-01-16T21:58:09Z")
> [@Troppus](#): > > In many cases the exact reason is very clear; just as it is when cuts heal themselves, colds and flus resolve, bruises fade, etc. It’s not surprising, and hasn’t been mysterious for years. Our bodies’ healing and restorative functions are powerful and complex, but the evidence as to how these mechanisms work is accessible. And the church makes no claim against this. Claims for miracles are different. They are made when something occurs that is extremely rare or even a singular event. > [@Troppus](#): > > How often do we seek to prove that the claimants were even afflicted? Do we ask them to produce medical records and other evidence they were actually suffering from the affliction they proclaim has been miraculously healed? > > Anyone who buys claims of the miraculous without demanding, examining, and vetting evidence is indeed: credulous. In the case of miracles recognized by the Catholic Church, all of them are vetted. Medical records are, in fact, demanded. In the case of miracles claimed as supporting evidence for sainthood, the church even has an official position to seek those records and put them forth as evidence that no miracle occurred. That is where the term “devil’s advocate” arose, from the Latin _Advocatus Diaboli_, the nickname given to the Promoter of the Faith in the canonization process, whose job it is to ensure that no evidence arguing against canonization is ignored. You may certainly argue that the church gets it wrong, but an accusation that claimants for miracles are accepted at their word is silly and demonstrably false. Obviously, there are many people who attribute to divine intervention events in their lives that are more easily attributed to coincidence or other causes. They may well be labeled credulous. It may very well happen that we eventually learn enough about medical science that we can eliminate every claim of a miracle. It certainly has not happened, yet. So claims of credulousness directed at official claims by the church represent a viewpoint of the speaker and do not represent any additional information in this discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/54 "2013-01-16T21:58:44Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > If an event or a phenomenon gets accepted as a miracle, it has to be the work of either overly credulous people or a charlatan. Yes, the church is more politically savvy than it once was (or rather, the politics have changed enough that they have to appear more choosy about the miracles they’ll accept). But that doesn’t actually equate to some sort of rigorous skepticism, just a CYA rejection of the more obvious fakes. If you believe (as you seem to) that miracles absolutely cannot and do not ever happen, then you have no reason to investigate or seek to disprove or debunk any particular purported miracle: you just say, _a priori_, “It can’t happen.” It’s only if you accept the possibility of miracles in general, as the Catholic Church does, that there’s a reason for skepticism, as opposed to outright dismissal, toward any particular purported miracle. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/55 "2013-01-16T23:08:43Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > If you trace this back to the original Slate article you’ll see that: > > [Link.](http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/new_scientist/2012/07/a_statue_of_jesus_oozing_holy_water_an_indian_skeptic_debunks_miracle.html) > > Laity. That’s not “The Catholic Church”. Well, as the OP said: > [@](#): > > Even if this is just local zealots - I challenge any catholic apologist here to explain to me why the catholic church, led by Rome, shouldn’t crack down upon their local chapters here and get the complaints withdrawn. JUSTIFY THE LACK OF ACTION. After all the church has shown many times it can be led from the centre when it suits it. In other words, haters gotta hate, y’all. If the Church had done as the OP said, it still would not have changed the OP’s mind about the Catholic Church as they would have merely find something else to confirm their bias. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/56 "2013-01-16T23:33:30Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Well, as the OP said: > > In other words, haters gotta hate, y’all. > > If the Church had done as the OP said, it still would not have changed the OP’s mind about the Catholic Church as they would have merely find something else to confirm their bias. I’m an atheist who thinks the RCC is an ossified bureaucracy half-stuck in the middle ages, so I’m not particularly keen on defending them, but I don’t see why they have to crack down on every lay group that goes off the reservation everywhere on the globe. If people want to be butthurt about this, so be it. I guess we can all manufacture a bunch of outrage if we really want to. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2013, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/57 "2013-01-17T01:05:31Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I’m an atheist who thinks the RCC is an ossified bureaucracy half-stuck in the middle ages, so I’m not particularly keen on defending them, but I don’t see why they have to crack down on every lay group that goes off the reservation everywhere on the globe. If people want to be butthurt about this, so be it. I guess we can all manufacture a bunch of outrage if we really want to. Well, I think that if there is not much outrage then we can expect the RCC to \*\*not \*\*do the right thing. I mean, if in this case there was one skeptic not getting his or her way on making a church drop a dubious miracle then I would think like you, that this would just amount to someone being butt-hurt. Not so in this case, we should not forget that the livelihood and well-being of a guy that bothered to tell it like it is, is being threatened. And it is clear that then others will be less willing to fight against ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![BigAppleBucky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigapplebucky/32/178_2.png) [@BigAppleBucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAppleBucky)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2013, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/58 "2013-01-17T16:38:06Z")
Interesting how Notre Dame glorified the death of Manti Te’o’s fake girlfriend and did everything possible to cover up the story of the real raped Lizzy Seeberg and her real death as well as the rape of another coed. Apparently SOP in Catholic institutions. [http://outkickthecoverage.com/manti-teos-fake-dead-girlfriend-breaks-the-internet.php](http://outkickthecoverage.com/manti-teos-fake-dead-girlfriend-breaks-the-internet.php) > **[Why I won’t be cheering for old Notre Dame](https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2012/12/04/why-i-wont-be-cheering-for-old-notre-dame/)** > > As a thought exercise, how many predators would have to be on the team before you'd no longer feel like cheering? ---
**Author:** ![BigAppleBucky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigapplebucky/32/178_2.png) [@BigAppleBucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAppleBucky)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2013, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/59 "2013-01-17T21:43:38Z")
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2013/01/17/a-fake-tragedy-gets-more-tears-than-a-real-one/](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2013/01/17/a-fake-tragedy-gets-more-tears-than-a-real-one/) **At Notre Dame, a fake tragedy gets more tears than a real one** > [@](#): > > So many tears for a fake dead girl, but none for a real one. > > The death of Notre Dame football star Manti Te’o’s beautiful, brave girlfriend Lennay Kekau – widely reported by Sports Illustrated, CBS and many other media outlets — was all an elaborate hoax. > > Which means my alma mater held an emotional press conference for a fake dead girl, but none for a real one. > > As I’ve reported before, evidence that the University of Notre Dame covers up for sexual predators on the football team in hopes of winning some games has been mostly ignored. > > **snip** > > (Lizzy) Seeberg (the real life rape victim) was ignored and threatened in life and purposefully lied about in death, but a story implicating those who run ND was for many of my fellow alums – and fellow journalists, too – too uncomfortable to want to know about. ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338/60 "2013-01-24T22:59:46Z")
The way I understand it the CC still requires two miracles in order for someone to become a saint, with the second one done posthumously. And I think 99% of such miracles are health claims, of which many will attest to being a huge gray area, unless someone wants to take a dead rotted body that stunk to their high heaven, and bring it back to life, like good ole biblical times. Now these folks knew what people had in mind on what should be considered a real miracle! How to become a [saint.](http://people.howstuffworks.com/question6191.htm) From this site: > [@](#): > > In Mother Teresa’s case, her supporters are arguing that she has performed at least two posthumous miracles. In one case, a French woman in the United States broke several ribs in a car accident – reportedly, her wounds were healed because she was wearing a Mother Teresa medallion. Another possible miracle occurred when Mother Teresa appeared in the dreams of a Palestinian girl, telling the girl that her cancer was cured. And according to that link, if you can’t get a miracle working on your behalf, you can still be beatified by dying for your religious cause. Damn, did Muslims got the same memo? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-evil-act-of-the-catholic-church/647338.md?page=4)