Canonization this year for Bl. Junipero Serra [CWN]

[sttcatherinefan]

The episode of EWTN Live covers the “controversy” in the later part of the show.

youtube.com/watch?v=zBpAWFVqfNg

I myself am overjoyed. I began my devotion to Bl. Serra’s canonization after I visited his tomb at Mission Carmel and read about his life.

There will always be detractors.

EWTN tends to whitewash things. I think that these criticisms are legit especially given Pope Francis’ love for the poor.

 

[christofirst]

EWTN tends to whitewash things. I think that these criticisms are legit especially given Pope Francis’ love for the poor.

First, an apology. I guess I tend to live in a happy Catholic bubble sometimes. I honestly did not remember any great controversy surrounding Fr. Serra. After you brought it up, my dear old mother showed me this article from yesterday’s L.A. Times:

latimes.com/local/california/la-me-serra-20150117-story.html#page=1

Now the L.A. Times is usually no great friend of the Church, but even this article presents a more balanced view of Junipero Serra than you seem to acknowledge. I think lvcabbie in the previous post here and blog link has done as commendable and convincing a job as any in pointing out the revisionist tactics being used to discredit Serra.

Concerning Pope Francis’ love for the poor, I think it would be a mistake to think the Holy Father only cares about our temporal wellbeing. His first major publication, Evangelii Gaudium, The Joy of the Gospel, was all about evangelization - proclaiming the Gospel message in our world today. The main business of the Church is still winning souls for Christ, as it was in Serra’s time, even if the way we go about it has changed with the times.

I do not see the California Mission system as a means of enslavement, but as a support system for a people facing inevitable changes. Seen in that light, Fr. Serra cared for the poor and suffering just as much as Francis does now. I still see plenty of creditable evidence in support of Padre Serra, and apparently Pope Francis does too.

 

[sttcatherinefan]

And I would like to hear Pope Francis respond to the criticisms of Father Serra, many of which are harsher than that. I’d be interested in his take on this.

 

[Memaw]

And I would like to hear Pope Francis respond to the criticisms of Father Serra, many of which are harsher than that. I’d be interested in his take on this.

He already has, by announcing his canonization !! Pope Francis told us to listen to him and NOT the media! God Bless, Memaw

 

[sttcatherinefan]

He already has, by announcing his canonization !! Pope Francis told us to listen to him and NOT the media! God Bless, Memaw

And I’m not sure if Pope Francis is aware of the controversy surrounding Father Serra.

 

[Memaw]

And I’m not sure if Pope Francis is aware of the controversy surrounding Father Serra.

You can sure the Pope knows all about it as they have a very very thorough investigation that has been going on for years. He knows more than you or I ever will. Trust the Church! Maybe you should study up on the Canonization process. It is Infallible. God Bless, Memaw

 

[CatholicFireman]

EWTN tends to whitewash things. I think that these criticisms are legit especially given Pope Francis’ love for the poor.

Now you are taking the word of the press (or PBS) over the Pope. Who’s to say PBS doesn’t whitewash things. Don’t you think it’s sort of an insult to Pope Francis as both Pope and a Jesuit to doubt his better judgement? I’m willing to bet that he does his homework before canonizing saints.

I guess it’s a matter who you chose to believe.

 

[lvcabbie]

First, an apology. I guess I tend to live in a happy Catholic bubble sometimes. I honestly did not remember any great controversy surrounding Fr. Serra. After you brought it up, my dear old mother showed me this article from yesterday’s L.A. Times:

latimes.com/local/california/la-me-serra-20150117-story.html#page=1

Now the L.A. Times is usually no great friend of the Church, but even this article presents a more balanced view of Junipero Serra than you seem to acknowledge. I think lvcabbie in the previous post here and blog link has done as commendable and convincing a job as any in pointing out the revisionist tactics being used to discredit Serra.

Concerning Pope Francis’ love for the poor, I think it would be a mistake to think the Holy Father only cares about our temporal wellbeing. His first major publication, Evangelii Gaudium, The Joy of the Gospel, was all about evangelization - proclaiming the Gospel message in our world today. The main business of the Church is still winning souls for Christ, as it was in Serra’s time, even if the way we go about it has changed with the times.

I do not see the California Mission system as a means of enslavement, but as a support system for a people facing inevitable changes. Seen in that light, Fr. Serra cared for the poor and suffering just as much as Francis does now. I still see plenty of creditable evidence in support of Padre Serra, and apparently Pope Francis does too.

Thank you!

After having extensively researched the missions and Father Serra, I totally agree with your last paragraph.

As for Francis, he is, by far, the perfect example of what a humble priest should be.

 

[lvcabbie]

And I’m not sure if Pope Francis is aware of the controversy surrounding Father Serra.

Are you kidding us?

Francis is a scholar and I am certain he chose his papal name based upon an extensive study of the Franciscans and their efforts. I am certain he has read every single tome lauding and damning Father Serra.

This comes from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

The Catholic Church canonizes or beatifies only those whose lives have been marked by the exercise of heroic virtue, and only after this has been proved by common repute for sanctity and by conclusive arguments

I think the main point here is “heroic virtue”. I see nowhere where miracles are included - although they may be in later parts of the section on Beautification.

Anyone who has studied Father Serra’s life can attest there is plenty of proof of his heroic virtues - even those who were considered his enemies at the time lauded his piety and devotion.

 

[LisaA]

Now you are taking the word of the press (or PBS) over the Pope. Who’s to say PBS doesn’t whitewash things. Don’t you think it’s sort of an insult to Pope Francis as both Pope and a Jesuit to doubt his better judgement? I’m willing to bet that he does his homework before canonizing saints.

I guess it’s a matter who you chose to believe.

Quite honestly if there is one we have learned it’s NOT to accept what the media says about our faith and about our Holy Father or to even quote him correctly. How many times have headlines screamed one heretical statement after another, only to be found complete bunk. PBS is a particularly Left leaning, secular and anti-religion (other than Islam that they routinely defend) based group. You might as well listen to what MSNBC or HuffPo says about any religious matters as PBS…not you CatholicFiremen but those who get their Catholic news from secular sources. As to the Pope not being aware of any controversy surrounding Bl Junipero Serra…not very credible.

I am applauding this wonderful and deserved recognition.

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

As a Californian I am most pleased, also it means that the Capitol Building will have a saint in it.

 

[CatholicFireman]

Quite honestly if there is one we have learned it’s NOT to accept what the media says about our faith and about our Holy Father or to even quote him correctly. How many times have headlines screamed one heretical statement after another, only to be found complete bunk. PBS is a particularly Left leaning, secular and anti-religion (other than Islam that they routinely defend) based group. You might as well listen to what MSNBC or HuffPo says about any religious matters as PBS…not you CatholicFiremen but those who get their Catholic news from secular sources. As to the Pope not being aware of any controversy surrounding Bl Junipero Serra…not very credible.

I am applauding this wonderful and deserved recognition.

Bravo.

Or as I like to say, Huffington Compost.

 

[CaptFun]

As a Californian I am most pleased, also it means that the Capitol Building will have a saint in it.

http://www.aoc.gov/sites/default/fi...ork/6264103164_e1bc7eae07_o.jpg?itok=UoChsJLZ

You reminded me of another “American Saint” of sort with your post. This is a picture of the statue of St. Damien De Vuester, donated to Statuary Hall in Washington, D.C. in 1969 by the state of Hawaii. There’s another of him at the Hawaiian state capitol.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Here’s a nice statue of Serra in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Complaints to the city about it from secular enemies seem to have led to shrubbery being allowed to all but obscure it today. Rather like the once-famous Mt. Davidson hilltop cross overlooking the city from its highest point.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[CatholicFireman]

I bet they clean it up come September. I have hope. After all, who would have ever thought they’d have a Walk for Life in SF?

 

[Dusenberg]

It is my understanding that Serra is a highly controversial figure because of his treatment of the Native Americans on the missions. pbs.org/weta/thewest/people/s_z/serra.htm

I don’t think that Pope Francis should canonize him, especially not without a second miracle. It really doesn’t square with Francis’ love for the poor.

Yes it does. Were it not for the Church and Serra in Alta California, the secular effects of colonialism would have completely annihilated the indigenous peoples.

 

[Dusenberg]

I definitely learned about the mistreatment by the English and the Spanish and the Americans in school. However, none of these people are being declared saints.

I also have an understanding of the canonization process. It is infallible. However, that doesn’t mean that Pope Francis needs to go through with the canonization; it just means that there are some highly controversial people who made it into Heaven. I just think that based on who Pope Francis is why would he want to canonize someone who has a poor track record with indigenous people and the poor. Some of what I read about life on the missions for the Native Americans is quite horrendous. It is likely to cause controversy and protests in done during Francis’ trip to the U.S.

I’m thinking that perhaps Pope Francis doesn’t realize what a controversial figure Father Serra is in the U.S. The missionaries in Latin America tended to be much more sensitive to the natives. I certainly hope someone asks him; I’d like to get his thoughts on this.

The documented fact is that Serra advocated strongly on behalf of the indigenous people in Alta California with regard to the provisional secular government. This decision is not being based on fickle politics, there is plenty of historical back-up to ensure Serra will be canonized.

The Mission Chain that runs through Alta and Baja California originally ran all the way to Guatemala within the mainland. It began with the Jesuits and was then given taken over by the Franciscans. To suggest that “The missionaries in Latin America tended to be much more sensitive to the natives” is without historical accuracy.

 

[Dusenberg]

And I’m not sure if Pope Francis is aware of the controversy surrounding Father Serra.

That’s quite impossible. Do you have any idea how many decades of research that have went into Pope Francis’ decision? The Serra Cause has been collecting and analyzing his life and works since the 1940’s. Pope Francis has all the information he needs.

 

[Memaw]

As a Californian I am most pleased, also it means that the Capitol Building will have a saint in it.

And boy can we use him. I for one will try to keep him very busy praying for our government. God Bless, Memaw

 

[lvcabbie]

Yes it does. Were it not for the Church and Serra in Alta California, the secular effects of colonialism would have completely annihilated the indigenous peoples.

Thank you!

I think I posted this here but, if not, it’s on my blog.

Haters of Father Serra and the church make claims they were responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Indians.

The first mission was founded in 1769 and they were started to be taken away from the church in 1935. That is a period of 76 years! Those natives who died during that time were no more than what would have died of their own diseases, droughts, locust swarms, and hunger. And, if falling ill, had nobody to treat them back to help.

The truth be none, more natives were forced into serfdom after secularization where they were forced to work in rags and meager rations by those swearing allegiance to the newly independent Mexico.

Then came the Yankees! The slaughter was horrible - and unreported then and now. The current Indian reservations throughout California are the result of American government.

So, when detractors do their best to denigrate Reverend Father Serra, tell them to read the unbiased history and get it straight.

 

[Tomdstone]

Is it true that Father Serra’s legacy included forced labor of converted Indians, and beatings and whippings of Indians?