5 Comments
โญ  Return to thread

--> I like the โœ… and โŒ to visually help understand the ruling. I'm glad you didn't go with ๐Ÿ˜Š and ๐Ÿ˜ .

--> Was this supposed to be "... a declaration of either constat de supernaturalitate ('confirmed to be of ๐˜€๐˜‚๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ป๐—ฎ๐˜๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐—น origin') or non constat de supernaturalitate ("confirmed to be of non-supernatural origin') ..."?

Expand full comment

Thanks so much for catching that mistake. I've corrected it

Expand full comment

I hate to nitpick, but I think non constat de supernaturalitate means "not confirmed to be of supernatural origin" while constat de nonsupernaturalitate would be "confirmed to be of non-supernatural origin." It's the difference between something being unconfirmed and something being proven to have a natural explanation. You're right about the first one. So there used to be three classifications: confirmed to be supernatural, unconfirmed to be supernatural, and confirmed to be non-supernatural. Jimmy Akin had a good explanation somewhere, but I can't find it anymore.

Expand full comment

Jimmy did a good, short podcast about it on Mysterious World. I think he will have a new, longer one about it this week.

Expand full comment

That's a good distinction. I'll change it

Expand full comment