Today is the 13th day of the calendar month falling on a Friday. Many cultures consider the combination as something evil. The superstition seems to relate to various things, like the story of Jesus' last supper and crucifixion in which there were 13 individuals present in the Upper Room on the 13th of Nisan Maundy Thursday, the night before his death on Good Friday (Courtesy: [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friday_the_13th#Christian_associations)) . Surely the Catholic Church is aware that many of her followers are victims of the superstition. One gets to hear priests speaking against superstitions like the one involving Friday the 13th. One also gets to read about them. **My question is**: Has the Catholic Church officially denounced the superstition involving Friday the 13th?

There was a quickly deleted S.E. post that responded to this question, "is there any way for a rational person to reach the conclusion that Christianity is definitely true?" The post that was deleted was from a responder who brought up the thought that Christianity is a "superstitious" philosophy. What is a general survey of the ways that Christian apologists have responded to the specific argument that Christianity is a "superstitious" philosophy, apart from just ignoring it?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that superstition is not supposed to be practiced and it is a violation of the 1st Commandment to honor God about all else. However, there's always something going on like a 9 day novena or a 40 day fast or a request to return to a particular grotto on the 11th of each month. Then there's other significant numbers like 3 and 7 and 12 which are supposed to mean something and spooky numbers like 6 and 666. So, where is the line between superstition and awe at the way God orders things mightily?

This chart from Wikipedia quite nicely explains what pseudoscience is: I think it's quite clear from the Bible that we Christians shouldn't give room to superstitions. As pseudoscience is close to superstition, should we treat it the same? What guidelines should be used when deciding whether to believe what some call pseudoscience? For reference, some examples of claimed pseudoscience (from Wikipedia ): > Examples of pseudoscience concepts, proposed as scientific when they are not scientific, are creation science, intelligent design, orgone energy, N-rays, ch'i, L. Ron Hubbard's engram theory, enneagram, iridology, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, New Age psychotherapies (e.g., rebirthing therapy), reflexology, applied kinesiology, astrology, biorhythms, facilitated communication, plant perception, extrasensory perception (ESP), Velikovsky's ideas, von Däniken's ideas, Sitchen's ideas, anthropometry, post-normal science, craniometry, graphology, metoposcopy, personology, physiognomy, acupuncture, alchemy, cellular memory, Lysenkoism, naturopathy, reiki, Rolfing, therapeutic touch, ayurvedic medicine, and homeopathy. (You may assume that creation science and intelligent design are in fact *protoscience*, if you want to avoid focusing on them.)

It is common among many Christians to say "God bless you" (or simply "bless you," which implies the former) to a person when they sneeze. I have heard that this may have originated with an old belief that evil spirits were coming out of a person when they sneezed. Is there any basis (scriptural or otherwise) within Christianity for saying "God bless you" when a person sneezes?

Since Enlightenment we seem to have entered an age where “reality” is often confined to empirical explanations. Yet the Bible speaks of a spiritual reality that is not open to empirical investigation. Are there any generally accepted (within Christianity) writings on this subject? If defining "reality" is a branch of philosophical thought, who are the writers of such thought and are there any summaries of their perspectives?