“Late Pope Could Be Saint Soon.” How? WHY?

[Steve_O_Brien]

Even though abortion is a sin, there is no evidence that the pope keeps up with the voting records of all Catholic legislators in every country in the world on every subject. That would be an absurd amount of information. I keep up with the news and live in America and I don’t even know who you’re talking about. There is a reason why the Catholic Church practices local control on many issues. Even a bishop would have his hands full with a single parish.

Just get onto the e-mail list of *LifeSite *and you’ll be up to speed in no time:

lifesite.net/

Abortion is not merely a sin: Pope John Paul II taught in section 58 of the 1995 encyclical Evangelium vitae that it’s “murder.”

And I’m sure that they have e-mail in the Vatican. Even before e-mail, they probably received newspapers from various countries, including the United States.

Keep and spread the Faith.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Those others would be diabolically mangling the true notion of Jesus’s forgiveness.

Fortunately, there is no danger that anyone could go to the opposite extreme, and misunderstand the true notion of Jesus’s mercy…

:twocents:
tee

 

[Steve_O_Brien]

That is something between her and her local bishop. The Pope’s job is not to micro-manage the church.

I personally think that, based on what I see, she should be excommunicated along with every other Catholic who publicly supports postions which are in opposition to Catholic church teaching BUT it is NOT my place to judge the local bishop for not taking certain actions which I think that he should. That judgement is reserved for the Father.

As our Lord’s revelations to Mutter Vogel state, we should NEVER attack a priest, even when he’s in error because every Priest is Christ’s Vicar and Jesus’s heart will be sickened and insulted if an unkind word is spoken about a priest EVEN IF IT IS TRUE.

I’m delighted to know that Sir Knight believes that pro-abortion politicians should be excommunicated. I respectfully and fraternally disagree, however, with his additional comments.

The words that Mutter Vogel attributes to Christ have already been shown to be words that Christ could not have said. Please recall my objection: are the parents of a boy being sexually abused by a priest to refrain from “attacking” the priest? Are they merely to pray for the priest privately and do nothing more?

St. Paul and Pope John Paul II also disagree with Sir Knight’s supplementary comments. St. Paul reproved the first Pope “to his face” (*Gal *2:11), and John Paul II taught in his catechism that a Catholic layperson has every right to voice his or her opinion when the common good of the Church makes this necessary. Again, please see *CCC *907.

By the way, all that yours truly is doing is making use of the right that CCC 907 acknowledges.

Keep and spread the Faith.

 

[pnewton]

. Even before e-mail, they probably received newspapers from various countries, including the United States.

And if the Holy Father spent five minutes a day reading a newpaper from each country where there are Catholics that sould be about ten hours. Then there is all the internet surfing he is expected to do. You do not get it. The Holy Father must rely on subordinates in local countries. I still think this boils down to an America-centric view of things. “Why does the Pope knoe more about us. We’re AMURCANS.”

Here is a list of other countries he needs to be informed about.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholicism_by_country#By_country

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

What do you think it means to be named a Saint? You say he is probably in Heaven, then you debate if he should be named a Saint… Do realize that is contradictory?

Now I believe my grandmother is probably in heaven. But I dont plan on her being canonized anytime soon.

When the Catholic Church names a Saint…they name that person a Saint so that he can be an example of extreme piety and/or a role model.

All im saying is…that despite John Paul II’s personal holiness, his acts as Pontiff etc. etc. I just dont think he should be a Saint.

Of what would he be the patron of? Holy Pontiffs? People who suffered from parkinsons?

There is nothing ordinary about this man’s life, but there is nothing so extraordinary about it that he must be named a Saint.

Dont get me mixed up with the other poster here who thinks JPII was responsible for all the molestations going on. Such a notion is unthinkable.

Missa, didn’t your mother ever tell you that its wrong to keep a record of wrongs?

And where is your record of his “rights”? Why don’t you start a list? I’d like to see it when you are done. Next year!

Your right, it is wrong to keep a record of wrongs.

But the Congregation for the Cause of Saints (or whatever its called…name is slipping my mind right now) has 100+ volumes of problems with St. Josemaria Escriva (who is a personal favorite Saint of mine)

We have to consider things before choosing somone as a vessel of devotion and Holiness.

The Church has not yet discovered everything there is to know about JPII yet…good or bad.

Pax

 

[tee_eff_em]

St. Paul and Pope John Paul II also disagree with Sir Knight’s supplementary comments. St. Paul reproved the first Pope “to his face” (*Gal *2:11), and John Paul II taught in his catechism that a Catholic layperson has every right to voice his or her opinion when the common good of the Church makes this necessary. Again, please see *CCC *907.

I think you mean: “the first SAINT Pope”

 

[pnewton]

I think you mean: “the first SAINT Pope”

:tiphat: touche.

 

[Steve_O_Brien]

I think you mean: “the first SAINT Pope”

Gorilla is intimating that a saintly Pope can allow scandals, and that, for this reason, Pope John Paul II can be canonized.

No. There are gradations among scandals. Some scandals are more devastating to the human dimensions of the Church than others are. Declining to eat non-kosher food (which was the scandal that St. Peter committed) is not as serious as allowing people to get the impression that the legalized murder of unborn children should not upset us. Nor is St. Peter’s scandal as grave as permitting people to get the impression that the one true Church minimizes the sin of child molestation.

In addition, it appears from Scripture that St. Peter accepted St. Paul’s fraternal correction and thus removed the scandal. In the case of Pope John Paul II, however, none of his bishops had the courage to engage in public fraternal correction of the Pope, with the exceptions of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer. Those two bishops, however, made the terrible mistakes of (1) rejecting the Pope’s authority over the liturgy, and (2) going into schism.

The solution to the post-Vatican II crisis is not schismatic “traditionalism” or sedevacantism. These are not solutions, but traps set by the Devil.

Keep and spread the Faith.

 

[pnewton]

Gorilla is intimating that a saintly Pope can allow scandals, and that, for this reason, Pope John Paul II can be canonized.

No.

Are you sure? You have already decided for the Church? Good thing you have no say in the matter since you have already made up your mind.

 

[Sir_Knight]

God’s future forgiveness for the repentant does ***NOT ***cancel the Church’s right and obligation to bar obstinate public sinners from Holy Communion and to excommunicate them. If the Church does not have this right, then St. Paul was wrong to warn–harshly and ominously–against sacrilegious Communions in 1 Cor 11:27-32.

This exclusion from Holy Communion is explicitly envisaged in the Church’s legislation (canon 915). Are we to say that Christ’s Church is thereby violating the duty of forgiveness?

Your mixing two issues. Excommunication are for those who refuse to repent. Forgiveness are for those who do seek repentance.

What you APPEAR to be saying is that when priests ask for forgiveness, the church should deny them that forgiveness and excommunicate them for their actions anyway and that is not in line with Christ’s teachings – forgiveness is for those that seek it and excommunication is for those who refuse to repentant.

 

[Steve_O_Brien]

Are you sure? You have already decided for the Church? Good thing you have no say in the matter since you have already made up your mind.

Yes, I am sure.

No, I have not already decided for the Church. The Church will make her own decision, and the decision will be that she cannot canonize a Pope who allowed such terrible scandals as those which Pope John Paul II allowed. But we must be grateful for, and thoroughly study, the catechism that he promulgated.

Yes, I do have a say in the matter, as Pope John Paul II himself acknowledges in section 907 of his catechism. Again, please read that section.

To canonize John Paul II would be an act of kindness toward him, but it would not be an act of kindness toward the unborn children and molested minors whom his scandalous laissez-faire policies of Church governance endangered. Nor would it be an act of kindness toward the millions of Catholics who have been scandalized and confused by those policies, in some cases to such an extent that they have gone into schism or become sedevacantists.

How can we tell Joe Sixpack that abortion is murder when he sees politicians such as John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi being allowed to present themselves as Catholics in good standing and to receive Holy Communion? Please see the photo below.

Again, let’s honor John Paul II, not by promoting a canonization that cannot take place, but by using his catechism to keep and spread the Faith.

Keep and spread the Faith.

 

[Steve_O_Brien]

You’re mixing two issues. Excommunications are for those who refuse to repent. Forgiveness is for those who do seek repentance.

What you APPEAR to be saying is that when priests ask for forgiveness, the church should deny them that forgiveness and excommunicate them for their actions anyway and that is not in line with Christ’s teachings – forgiveness is for those that seek it and excommunication is for those who refuse to be repentant.

The Church, in the name of Christ, extends forgiveness to all who are truly sorry for their sins, whatever those sins are. Some people, however, are not sorry for their sins and do not repent.

A blatant example of this refusal to repent is the Catholic politician who continues, in defiance of the Church’s teaching, to support the legality of abortion, which, as we know from Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Evangelium vitae (section 58), is murder.

John Paul II and his bishops should have warned such politicians, urging them to repent and to ask for forgiveness for the evil that they had promoted. And, in the absence of such repentance, the Pope and the bishops should have excommunicated such politicians as an act of love for everyone concerned, including the politicians who jeopardized their own salvation by supporting legalized murder.

Again, excommunication is an act of love.

Keep and spread the Faith.

 

[prodigal-sun]

Here is what our Holy Father has to say about saints in heaven from zenit news here: zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=102145

Code: ZE07013104
Date: 2007-01-31
Saints Weren’t Perfect, Pope Says
Claims Holiness Is Something Everyone Can Learn

" VATICAN CITY, JAN. 31, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The saints are not people who never made mistakes or sinned, but who repented and were reconciled, says Benedict XVI.

This fact is a personal consolation for the Pope himself, as he explained in today’s general audience.

Addressing some 6,000 people in Paul VI Hall, the Holy Father dedicated his weekly address to focus on three of St. Paul’s closest collaborators: Barnabas, Silas and Apollos.

The Pontiff explained that on occasions Paul had confrontations with them, at least with Barnabas, because of differences of opinion on specific questions.

“Hence, also among saints there are oppositions, discords and controversies And this is very consoling for me, as we see that the saints have not ‘fallen from heaven,’” the Holy Father said.

“They are men like us, with complicated problems. Holiness does not consist in not making mistakes or never sinning,” Benedict XVI continued. "Holiness grows with the capacity for conversion, repentance, willingness to begin again, and above all with the capacity for reconciliation and forgiveness.

“And we can all learn this way of holiness.”

The Pope’s address continued with the series of meditations he has been giving on the first apostles and evangelizers of the early Church."

**As for Mr. O’Brien judgements on a man. He clearly does not know what the conditions of JPII soul was upon his death. The Only comment that I can agree with that Steve made was, “The Church will make her own decision…”, What ever that decision is I’ll have no proplem with and I imagine any good Catholic will submit to the decision of the church! Steve you may be right, who knows. I certainly don’t and by what I have read from you on this thread neither do you! I’m curious however what will you do if the church decides against your great wisdom and makes a decision for beatification? Will you submit to the greater knowledge & authority of the church? **
Peace to you and yours

 

[Sir_Knight]

The Church, in the name of Christ, extends forgiveness to all who are truly sorry for their sins, whatever those sins are. Some people, however, are not sorry for their sins and do not repent.

This is true and when God forgives, He forgives & forgets. Both scripture and the catechism stress this point.

A blatant example of this refusal to repent is the Catholic politician who continues, in defiance of the Church’s teaching, to support the legality of abortion, which, as we know from Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Evangelium vitae (section 58), is murder.

No disagreement there.

John Paul II and his bishops should have warned such politicians, urging them to repent and to ask for forgiveness for the evil that they had promoted. And, in the absence of such repentance, the Pope and the bishops should have excommunicated such politicians as an act of love for everyone concerned, including the politicians who jeopardized their own salvation by supporting legalized murder.

John Paul II and THROUGH his bishops should have warned such politicians, urging them to repent and to ask for forgiveness for the evil that they had promoted. The Pope can not micro-manage 1+ billion Catholics. That is why he relies on his bishops

Again, excommunication is an act of love.

Toward those who refuse to repent. NOT toward those that do seek forgiveness.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

On the contrary, Pope John the Great can and more than likely WILL be canonized.

This is a recent and wise observation from our Holy Father:

“Sanctity does not consist in never having made mistakes or sinned. Sanctity grows in the capacity for conversion and penance, of willingness to start again and, above all, in the capacity for reconciliation and forgiveness."

For the full article on, see:

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=48970

 

[Steve_O_Brien]

Here is what our Holy Father has to say about saints in heaven from Zenit news here: zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=102145

Code: ZE07013104
Date: 2007-01-31
Saints Weren’t Perfect, Pope Says
Claims Holiness Is Something Everyone Can Learn

" VATICAN CITY, JAN. 31, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The saints are not people who never made mistakes or sinned, but who repented and were reconciled, says Benedict XVI.

This fact is a personal consolation for the Pope himself, as he explained in today’s general audience.

Addressing some 6,000 people in Paul VI Hall, the Holy Father dedicated his weekly address to focus on three of St. Paul’s closest collaborators: Barnabas, Silas and Apollos.

The Pontiff explained that on occasions Paul had confrontations with them, at least with Barnabas, because of differences of opinion on specific questions.

“Hence, also among saints there are oppositions, discords and controversies And this is very consoling for me, as we see that the saints have not ‘fallen from heaven,’” the Holy Father said.

“They are men like us, with complicated problems. Holiness does not consist in not making mistakes or never sinning,” Benedict XVI continued. "Holiness grows with the capacity for conversion, repentance, willingness to begin again, and above all with the capacity for reconciliation and forgiveness.

“And we can all learn this way of holiness.”

The Pope’s address continued with the series of meditations he has been giving on the first apostles and evangelizers of the early Church."

**As for Mr. O’Brien’s judgements on a man. He clearly does not know what the condition of JPII’s soul was upon his death. The Only comment that I can agree with that Steve made was, “The Church will make her own decision…”, Whatever that decision is I’ll have no proplem with and I imagine any good Catholic will submit to the decision of the church! Steve you may be right, who knows? I certainly don’t and by what I have read from you on this thread neither do you! I’m curious however what will you do if the church decides against your great wisdom and makes a decision for beatification? Will you submit to the greater knowledge & authority of the church? **
Peace to you and yours

I’m sure that our current Holy Father did not mean that there are no degrees of sin, and thus no degrees of scandal. I’m sure that Pope Benedict XVI had no intention of repealing the distinction that Pope John Paul II’s catechism draws between mortal sin and venial sin (section 1854).

I wish always to submit to the knowledge and authority of the Catholic Church. I do not, however, believe that the Church can, or will, beatify Pope John Paul II.

Again, let’s pray for the soul of John Paul II, and let’s be grateful for, and study, his catechism, which was the greatest contribution of his troubled pontificate.

Keep and spread the Faith.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I do not, however, believe that the Church can, or will, beatify Pope John Paul II.

What will you do if (I believe “when”) she does? Canonizations are regarded as infallible pronouncements.

 

[Sir_Knight]

The words that Mutter Vogel attributes to Christ have already been shown to be words that Christ could not have said.

The church disagrees with you on that point because they have ruled that the message is WORTHY OF BELIEF and DOES NOT CONTAIN ANYTHING CONTRARY TO THE TEACHINGS OF THE CHURCH.

 

[Steve_O_Brien]

What will you do if (I believe “when”) she does? Canonizations are regarded as infallible pronouncements.

Canonizations are indeed infallible, but I don’t believe that this crisis of conscience will ever materialize.

Omitting all other considerations, I can point out the following: Pope Benedict XVI would like the ending of the Lefebvrist schism to be one of the contributions of his papacy. This is indeed a wonderful objective for which we should all pray. The Holy Father knows that beatifying his predecessor would make ending this schism even more arduous and even more unlikely.

The Lefebvrist schismatics and other schismatic “traditionalists” would be traumatized by this beatification and would be further alienated from communion with the successor of Peter. (Many Catholics who have not gone into schism would also be troubled.)

Even if you don’t realize that the beatification of Pope John Paul II is impossible, I ask you: why should Pope Benedict do something which is unnecessary for the defense of the Faith, and which will needlessly alienate people from the one true Church?

Keep and spread the Faith.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I ask you: why should Pope Benedict do something which is unnecessary for the defense of the Faith, and which will needlessly alienate people from the one true Church?

How do you know that the canonization/beatification of John Paul is ‘unnecessary for the defense of the Faith?’ It might be part of God’s plan. How do you know it might not instead bring people TO the one true Church?

Above all, does the Church (and/or the Holy Father) act from utilitarianism or from the Holy Spirit?