Clarification regarding All Saints Day?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sir_Knight
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sir_Knight

Guest
I recall being taught in grammer school that All Saints Day was to honor all of the saints who are in heaven that have not been OFFICIALLY canonized. Today, however, during the homily the deacon said that today we honor those saints that HAVE BEEN officially canonized. I thought that those that have been canonized were already honored with their own feast day and I mentioned this to him after mass. And he said ‘no’.

Now I’m confused. Was I taught incorrectly 40+ years ago? Has the church teaching on this changed since then? Or, is the deacon mistaken?

All Saints Day – Honor Canonized or Uncanonized Saints?
 
During the homily today the priest said All Saints Day originated during the 4th century. The reason was there were so many martyrs during this time that each could not have their own day. Pope Gregory set Nov 1 as a day for all saints. If you are martyred for the faith you are a saint regardless of whether you are officially canonized or not. Correct me if I am wrong in this statement.
 
All Saint’s Day is just that, All Saints. Whether canonized or not, whther a martyr or not, we remember all the Saints that have done God’s will.
 
All Saint’s Day is just that, All Saints. Whether canonized or not, whther a martyr or not, we remember all the Saints that have done God’s will.
All Saints does, indeed, strictly mean all of them. Yet the intention of the feast is just as Sir Knight originally thought to commemorate those who do not get specific notice some time during the year.
 
So the Deacon’s homily was incorrect?
I think he was correct but gave an incomplete answer. The feast honors the “official” saints, whether they have gone through the canonization process or were recognized by earlier processes (early martyrs or saints by acclamation). It is especially for those without their own day on the calendar. Those that have not been recognized by the Church are known only to God and we include them with hope in the All Souls Day commemoration.
 
Those that have not been recognized by the Church are known only to God and we include them with hope in the All Souls Day commemoration.
I thought All Souls Day were for those that had not yet made it to heaven because once they arrive in heaven, they are considered “Saints”.
 
This is important, and we must get this right (Corki’s post above is misleading and erroneous):
  1. All Saints honors everyone who is in heaven…whether we know their names or not, whether they’ve been canonized or not. If they’re in heaven, they’re celebrated on November 1. In other words, the Church Triumphant.
  2. All Souls commemorates (not honors) everyone who is in PURGATORY. In other words, the Church Suffering.
 
During the homily today the priest said All Saints Day originated during the 4th century. The reason was there were so many martyrs during this time that each could not have their own day. Pope Gregory set Nov 1 as a day for all saints. If you are martyred for the faith you are a saint regardless of whether you are officially canonized or not. Correct me if I am wrong in this statement.
I heard the exact same homily. St. Matthew’s?? 🙂
 
we must get this right
What’s with the imperative? If I pray for someone who has died and is not canonized on All Soul’s day, he may already be in heaven. By your logic, I would be in error if that was the case. The Church says that those prayers are NOT wasted and until the Church says that the person is definitely in heaven I can be hopeful but not certain that they are not in Purgatory. However, he may still need our prayers if he has not reached heaven as of yet.

One of the great tragedies of our times is that so few people are praying for the dear souls in Purgatory. Your post is one reason why.
 
It’s important to get the distinction straight.

On All Souls we pray for everyone who is in Purgatory.

On All Saints we pray TO everyone who is in Heaven.

We’re not leaving anyone out. We’re making an important distinction between the Church Triumphant and the Church Suffering.

My post reflected sound Catholic dogma.
 
If you are martyred for the faith you are a saint regardless of whether you are officially canonized or not. Correct me if I am wrong in this statement.
That doesn’t sound quite right to me. It certainly seems likely that a martyr for the faith would be a saint, but unless they are cannonized we do not know with certainty.

In the canonization process, the only distinction is that in the case of a martyr it is not necessary for there to be an authenticated miracle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top