It seems strange that Cicap would have been granted access to the "blood" of Saint Gennaro, especially given the Chruch's hesitancy in allowing independant analysis of the blood in the past. There appear to be contradicting reports on the issue of testing also, with the seemingly contradicting statement that
successive cardinals of Naples have been willing to allow independent scientists to examine the liquid but the glass phials are incredibly delicate and what would happen if they broke and the precious liquid was exposed to the air?
Now that the blood has been debunked, it is interesting to note the Church's reaction. They seemed quick to point out that the vial has never been held to be a miracle, simply "a sign". The Church does indeed appear to be sidestepping the ramifications of these findings, though, by making statements such as
There are many other important things for scientists to investigate.
I suppose the question that this debunking also raises is whether or not debunking "miracles" such as this are always justified. I support the search for the truth, no matter where that search leads us, but when should we stop to measure the cost? Is it better, in cases such as this, to let people retain their belief in the miraculous, even if we know it is demonstrably wrong? What do you think?
