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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steve_O_Brien
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Incense_Baby said:
My only agenda is concern the Church. Can we please focus?
Click to expand...
Then please do so…but as I have already stated, there is no reason that John Paul the Great should not be considered for canonization.

If your only agenda was as you assert you would be rejoicing in the metric boatload of excellent teaching that came from John Paul the Great’s pontificate.

If you have information and evidence tp present that would disqualify him then provide it or abandon your pretense.
 
Incense_Baby said:
I’m upset when we turn a blind eye to mistakes our pope and clergy make. It’s wrong and I don’t believe it’s good for the Church.
Click to expand...
I don’t think he ignored the sex abused problem, and I think he did everything he could to fight heresy in the church. I don’t really care about what some people perceive to be liturgical problems, and I think the things that he did do blew the things that he didn’t do out of the park.

Also, I personally would prefer that our current pope would do more in some areas, but it’s not my place to criticize him. I know nothing about carrying his cross, and I don’t have a fraction of his wisdom.

Kendy
 
Church_Militant said:
I would argue that people who assert that stuff have no one else to offer who even comes close to the level of holiness and pastoral wisdom that John Paul the great shared with the church.
…
Click to expand...
Amen to this!

Yes, there’s your answer, incense baby, right here – it really comes down to:
  • his level of holiness
  • his pastoral wisdom
Show us anyone who even comes close.

The Church has sinners. There are tares in the wheat. Jesus said don’t pull them. Jesus had his Judas. Nothing has changed.

Really, I think JPII’s detractors think he should have gone beyond what God himself whould do!
 
Human beings aren’t perfect, even the most Holy Saints and patriarchs and figures have, I’m sure, had their bad days. St. Peter denied Christ. King David killed a man out of lust for his wife… and yet God called him and man after His own heart…

The point of canonization and the saints are to give example of people who are in heaven and did much on Earth and held fast to the Catholic Faith. They are people whom we should live up to and who’s good examples we ought to follow.

John Paul II is a giant amongst men. And I can think of no other better candidate. I fully support and hope in his canonization.

A saint, by definition is one who is in heaven and can pray for you. If John Paul II meets that criteria, then there is no reason not to canonize him.
 
Steve_O_Brien said:
Perhaps St. Peter and other Catholics were initially upset when St. Paul, exercising the right and duty of fraternal correction, “opposed him [St. Peter] to his face” (Gal 2:11). In any case, he the first Pope appears to have accepted the correction, which St. Paul administered because St. Peter “clearly was wrong.”

With great respect for the office of the Vicar of Christ, it should be admitted that John Paul II clearly was wrong to allow the scandals that he allowed without taking adequate measures to root them out of the Church.

To point this out is to help save souls by helping people to absorb the Church’s teaching on the evil of scandal–a teaching found in John Paul II’s own catechism (sections 2284-2287).

As I indicated on the other thread, Pope John Paul II confirmed his bishops in their failure to excommunciate pro-abortion politicians. But how can abortion be murder if one can support its legality while at the same time presenting oneself as a Catholic in good standing and receiving Holy Communion?

Keep and spread the Faith.
Click to expand...
Let’s get one thing clear. You are not the apostle Paul.
 
Church_Militant said:
Then please do so…but as I have already stated, there is no reason that John Paul the Great should not be considered for canonization.

If your only agenda was as you assert you would be rejoicing in the metric boatload of excellent teaching that came from John Paul the Great’s pontificate.

If you have information and evidence tp present that would disqualify him then provide it or abandon your pretense.
Click to expand...
I rejoice that he preached the truth. But what else was he to preach?
 
Church_Militant said:
And those who take that opinion using his Catechism should back up and display obedience to the church.

I have yet to see any reason that John Paul the Great should not be considered for canonization.
Click to expand...
Is it of no serious consequence that he kissed the Koran? Or that he allowed a bear-breasted woman speak at mass? Or that he believed Pope Paul VI was a very holy man?
 
Incense_Baby said:
I rejoice that he preached the truth. But what else was he to preach?
Click to expand...
You are underestimating how hard it is to do that which God has called us to do. To be a saint is to do just that. Not something spectacular (although the former pope did much that was spectacular). But you can be a saint if you are called to collect garbage and you do it with great love.

Everyday I struggle to do this simple thing— not to feed 10,000 orphans, but to faithfully carry my cross with love and joy. To say that someone was faithful to God’s call is to say that he is a saint.

Kendy
 
Incense_Baby said:
Is it of no serious consequence that he kissed the Koran? Or that he allowed a bear-breasted woman speak at mass? Or that he believed Pope Paul VI was a great saint?
Click to expand...
  1. Simple courtesy, (and better than yours so far).
  2. Cultural differences…if you don’t like it don’t go there.
  3. And Pope Paul VI was not?
BTW, Is English not your native tongue because your sentences are not constructed quite right?
 
Church_Militant said:
What else would you have had from him?
Click to expand...
I believe that it’s not enough for us to jump to the conclusion that he’s a great saint for his preaching. I don’t think he was a bad pope, but I think he lacked courage to face his own clergy.
 
Kendy said:
I don’t think he ignored the sex abused problem, and I think he did everything he could to fight heresy in the church. I don’t really care about what some people perceive to be liturgical problems, and I think the things that he did do blew the things that he didn’t do out of the park.

Also, I personally would prefer that our current pope would do more in some areas, but it’s not my place to criticize him. I know nothing about carrying his cross, and I don’t have a fraction of his wisdom.

Kendy
Click to expand...
I mean no disrespect toward John Paul the II, but I find it hard to believe that he didn’t know the magnitude of the sex abuse problem. Also, I think liturgical problems are something all of us should care about.

Plus, I wish the late Holy Father would have spoken out more about catholic pro-abortion politicians. It wouldn’t have taken much, one press conference relating the state of grave sin these politicians were in might have convinced some to change their position and it might have convinced more lay catholics to take seriously the promotion of abortion that comes from their “pro-choice” candidate’s voting record.

I don’t want to take anything away from the late Holy Father. I believe he was a wonderful man, but I think it is too soon to judge whether or not he should be declared a saint. Afterall, the process has taken hundreds of years for some. In the meantime, I see nothing wrong with charitable discussion.
Everyone needs to take a deep breath.
 
Eliza10 said:
Amen to this!

Yes, there’s your answer, Incense Baby, right here – it really comes down to:
  • his level of holiness
  • his pastoral wisdom
Show us anyone who even comes close.

The Church has sinners. There are tares in the wheat. Jesus said don’t pull them. Jesus had his Judas. Nothing has changed.

Really, I think JPII’s detractors think he should have gone beyond what God himself would do!
Click to expand...
For high levels of holiness and pastoral wisdom, please consider Pope St. Pius X (1903-1914), whom the Church ***has ***declared a saint.

I urge you to read St. Pius X’s encyclical Pascendi, written to oppose the heresy of Modernism:

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis_en.html

In Pope John Paul II, we needed another St. Pius X. We needed someone to address the post-Vatican II confusion in the human dimensions of the one true Church. We needed a Pope who lucidly interpreted and courageously implemented the actual Second Vatican Council. Alas, we did not have another St. Pius X during John Paul II’s pontificate.

I cannot imagine St. Pius X allowing the scandals that John Paul II allowed. I cannot imagine, for example, St. Pius X permitting the sexual abuse scandal to develop in the priesthood.

Let’s face up to the truth, as painful as it may be. By all means, pray for the repose of John Paul II’s soul, and honor him by using his catechism to defend the Faith. But please recognize that he was not a St. Pius X.

Keep and spread the Faith.
 
marci said:
I mean no disrespect toward John Paul the II, but I find it hard to believe that he didn’t know the magnitude of the sex abuse problem. Also, I think liturgical problems are something all of us should care about.

Plus, I wish the late Holy Father would have spoken out more about catholic pro-abortion politicians. It wouldn’t have taken much, one press conference relating the state of grave sin these politicians were in might have convinced some to change their position and it might have convinced more lay catholics to take seriously the promotion of abortion that comes from their “pro-choice” candidate’s voting record.

I don’t want to take anything away from the late Holy Father. I believe he was a wonderful man, but I think it is too soon to judge whether or not he should be declared a saint. Afterall, the process has taken hundreds of years for some. In the meantime, I see nothing wrong with charitable discussion.
Everyone needs to take a deep breath.
Click to expand...
None of the things you mentioned show a lack of holiness on his part. Like I said earlier, there are lots of things that I think the pope should do, but that’s why God in his wisdom did not call me to the task. Do you know what thhe ramifications would have been if the pope had handled these problems differently? Just because the pope didn’t handle every problem the way you think he should have does not mean he was not faithful to the Lord. I want lots of theologians to be excommunicated, but maybe, the Holy Spirit wants to do something different thing. It’s not our place to make these decisions.

Kendy
 
Incense_Baby said:
I believe that it’s not enough for us to jump to the conclusion that he’s a great saint for his preaching. I don’t think he was a bad pope, but I think he lacked courage to face his own clergy.
Click to expand...
And I and many others heartily disagree.

Short of being Christ Himself His Holiness dealt with matters in all respects with charity and dignity. Something all of us can draw wisdom from.

So far as I can tell there is nothing in what you assert that would be cause to not canonize him.

If he’d’ve excommunicated SSPX and the Lefebrists (SP?) I don’t think the church would’ve been much the worse, and perhaps some of them would drop their pride and re-enter obedience to the church. (As well they should.) As it is I think he dealt with them and many others with pastoral wisdom and gentleness that was the very image of Our Lord.
 
Steve_O_Brien said:
For high levels of holiness and pastoral wisdom, please consider Pope St. Pius X (1903-1914), whom the Church ***has ***declared a saint.

I urge you to read St. Pius X’s encyclical Pascendi, written to oppose the heresy of Modernism:

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis_en.html

In Pope John Paul II, we needed another St. Pius X. We needed someone to address the post-Vatican II confusion in the human dimensions of the one true Church. We needed a Pope who lucidly interpreted and courageously implemented the actual Second Vatican Council. Alas, we did not have another St. Pius X during John Paul II’s pontificate.

I cannot imagine St. Pius X allowing the scandals that John Paul II allowed. I cannot imagine, for example, St. Pius X permitting the sexual abuse scandal to develop in the priesthood.

Let’s face up to the truth, as painful as it may be. By all means, pray for the repose of John Paul II’s soul, and honor him by using his catechism to defend the Faith. But please recognize that he was not a St. Pius X.

Keep and spread the Faith.
Click to expand...
God will address these problems in his time, not yours.
 
Steve_O_Brien said:
For high levels of holiness and pastoral wisdom, please consider Pope St. Pius X (1903-1914), whom the Church ***has ***declared a saint.

I urge you to read St. Pius X’s encyclical Pascendi, written to oppose the heresy of Modernism:

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis_en.html

In Pope John Paul II, we needed another St. Pius X. We needed someone to address the post-Vatican II confusion in the human dimensions of the one true Church. We needed a Pope who lucidly interpreted and courageously implemented the actual Second Vatican Council. Alas, we did not have another St. Pius X during John Paul II’s pontificate.

I cannot imagine St. Pius X allowing the scandals that John Paul II allowed. I cannot imagine, for example, St. Pius X permitting the sexual abuse scandal to develop in the priesthood.

Let’s face up to the truth, as painful as it may be. By all means, pray for the repose of John Paul II’s soul, and honor him by using his catechism to defend the Faith. But please recognize that he was not a St. Pius X.

Keep and spread the Faith.
Click to expand...
Very true. Excellent post.
 
Kendy said:
None of the things you mentioned show a lack of holiness on his part. Like I said earlier, there are lots of things that I think the pope should do, but that’s why God in his wisdom did not call me to the task. Do you know what thhe ramifications would have been if the pope had handled these problems differently? Just because the pope didn’t handle every problem the way you think he should have does not mean he was not faithful to the Lord. I want lots of theologians to be excommunicated, but maybe, the Holy Spirit wants to do something different thing. It’s not our place to make these decisions.

Kendy
Click to expand...
You’re right. It’s not our place to make these decisions, which is why I find it hypocritical to call him “The Great One” as if entitled to judge his sanctity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top