What is the process used by the Catholic Church for determining official miracles?

Answer 1

Let us define what a miracle is. Miracles are those occurrences wrought by the power of God which are wholly beyond the power of man to perform. Produced by a supernatural power, they are marvels, wonders, and signs which cannot be duplicated by man's present powers or by any powers by which he can obtain from scientific advancements. They are all occurrences which the Catholic church cannot duplicate, neither give an explanation for.

Answer 2

It would depend on what kind of miracle has occurred. Basically, the Church first seeks to determine what exactly has happened, or at least, what is claimed. It thus finds and interviews witnesses. After the claim is clear and established, rigorous testing is done in the area which has been involved, or on the individual who has undergone the miracle. In order to efface all bias the Vatican invites and seeks to involve as many secular authorities (doctors, scientists, lawyers, scholars, etc.) as may be required. The Vatican thus first seeks to explain the "miracle" through natural causes. This process may take weeks to years. Only when all natural explanation has been exhausted and when the witnesses have been proven of sound mind and character, and the effects of the miracle judged beneficial will the Vatican authenticate the miracle by publicly acknowledging it as only able to have been wrought by God Himself. Belief in the miracle is therefore encouraged by the Vatican to the faithful, but by no means is it necessary to believe in it as if doctrine; it is more to excite piety and has no ramifications on one's salvation.

As an example, take a case from Lourdes, where someone is healed miraculously of cancer thanks to bathing in the miraculous spring water there. First, it must be established who was there, where it happened, what the person was doing. Next, the person's doctor will be consulted - was cancer present in this person? To what degree? Was it in remission? Was it benign? Was it spreading? Was the person on any drugs or treatments? All test results will be scrutinized. New tests will be run. Specialists will be brought in and consulted. Medical hypotheses will be advanced and tested. The water that is said to have caused the miracle will be vigorously tested for its composition and properties. Attempts to replicate the cure will be done. The rest of the environment; air, plants, other people, possible contaminations, etc., will be tested. The tests will be repeated several times. The cured person's health will be monitored for a return of the cancer or any other effects. After everything has been tried and tried again, if no natural explanation can be found and all the documentation is in order, the healing will be recognized by the Vatican as miraculous. Science will simply state the cure as unprecedented and presently inexplicable. Sometimes, however, the secular specialists involved in such cases even convert.

Answer 3

There is a 2 part process, and neither of them are very quick.

1) The local bishop has to launch an investigation into it. They interview everybody associated with it and make sure it is real.

2) Their information goes to the Vatican, where the Copngregation for the Causes of Saints, reviews all the material, then debates it and prays about it.

The Church is naturally very skeptical, since many people try to fake miracles for their own personal glory, and neurotic people can experience things they assume are miracles, that are only hallucinations.

I found this link that you might find instructive: http://newsaints.faithweb.com/divinus.htm

Answer 4

The Catholic Church goes through what it regards as a rigorous process to ascertain that any miracles put forward in support of sainthood are genuine. This process is conducted in secret and involves medical and theological experts, as well as a "devil's advocate" who looks at the opposing view.

In the recent case of the proposed Australian saint, Mary McKillop, two cancer cure were said to have occurred as a result of prayers to the deceased Mary McKillop, but the Church did not release the names of the patients, out of respect for their privacy, nor the names of the experts or what evidence they considered. One of the patients has since come forward as having been miraculously cured, although she said that she never saw herself as a particularly strong Catholic.

In the absence of transparency and independent, expert review, the process of checking for miracles has to be regarded as flawed and arguably set up to serve the interests of the Church rather than to uncover the truth.