Do you feel uncomfortable that JP2's sainthood is being fast-tracked and that his canonization appears to be a forgone conclusion?

[Donna_Mc]

I wonder if this “fast tracking” is a function of the increased speed of communication in this modern era. In days past, someone very worthy of sainthood may have only been known in his own small area and the process of investigation very lenghty. Even Popes who became saints were probably largely unknown to most Catholics. They knew who their Pope was, but didn’t see his image on TV and the internet every day, didn’t follow news reports of every little thing he did, every speech he made. Not everything was newsworthy, and even if it was, it could take months to filter down to the masses. But John Paul was a household image. With communication being instantaneous, there are no long waits for reports or information. I can see where the process will be greatly speeded up from now on, not only for John Paul.

I agree with this, and I do not feel uncomfortable about his
cause being fast-tracked!

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Do you feel uncomfortable that JP2’s sainthood is being fast-tracked and that his canonization appears to be a forgone conclusion?

I do. Sainthood is too important a matter to be playing favorites (or at least that’s how it seems). There is a system in place for determining canonicity, and it should be followed without exception.

I think canonisation should be made almost impossible for Popes - him most definitely included.​

A few ideas:

• 3 miracles should be required (preferably 5) at each stage of the process - from being called
• **Servant of God to **
• **Venerable to **
• Blessed to Saint
• **The old 50-year interval between death & the opening of the cause should be restored: if someone really is a Saint, God will keep that person’s memory green & fragrant. To rush matters implies that Mother Teresa & JP2 either are forgettable, or that they are not holy after all. **
• **On no account should the interval be cut - for anyone. **
• **Popes should have absolutely no part whatever at any point in the causes of persons to whom they might be unduly favourable - a German Pope should have no part in the cause of a German bishop or Pope; only those who have no connection at all, whether by race or Order or the like, with the person in question, should deal with that person’s cause. **
  **There should be no more of large groups being canonised - people should be canonised as individuals, not in dozens or hundreds, like batches of fish or cheese. **

**Processes for dubious characters like Queen Isabella the Catholic should be dropped. People should be regarded as holy because they are Christlike, & for absolutely no other reason. Politics, in or out of the Church has no place whatever in such matters. Another cause that should be discontinued is Cardinal Cooke’s. **

**“Quickie” causes are altogether too reminiscent of our impatient times - we should get back to the habit of expecting causes to take centuries. I would like Oscar Romero to be canonised - but JP2 ? Nah. **

**That reminds me - there seems to be a cause for every Pope since & including Pius IX. Without meaning any disrespect to them, I do find it just a little hard to believe that the CC has been blessed with 159 years of Saints in the Papacy from 1846 to 2005. **

**I think the Devil’s Advocate should be restored - a lot of what certain “saints-in-the-making” have done is very dubious indeed: Paul VI is one example, Cardinal Schuster of Milan is another, Cardinal Cooke is a third. **

**But the emphasis on the laity was long overdue - most Catholics are laity. Many of them are married, & many others are students. Hardly any are priests or religious, & fewer still are bishops. A lot are mothers. **

**If a cause divides Catholics, rather than uniting them, it should be dropped - that it is divisive, is IMHO a clear indication that it is not a good thing. **

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Sainthood by popular acclaim is no longer used (as you concede), so I’m not sure I understand this.

And where is cannization by popular acclaim enshrined as a “right”?

What happened to:​

“The Church is NOT a democracy” ?** **

 

[consumedconvert]

I suppose the question is, am I afraid that the Magisterium will make a mistake? And of course the answer is,

If I’m a Catholic, why the devil would I be?

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Blessed Brother Andre has waited for 71 years, and yet people are already hoping that Pope John Paul II will be canonized soon or immediately.

**Cardinal Cesare Baronio (1538-1607) was not declared Venerable until 1745, 138 years after his death - he is still Venerable. **​

---

**Even that pales into insignificance compared to the stats for St. Boethius. He was martyred in 524, & canonised in 1883: a mere 1359 years later **

---

**I hope Origen will be be recognised as a Saint eventually - if ever he were, that would be a new record, as he died in 253/4 of his sufferings endured under persecution, 1754 years ago. **

 

[consumedconvert]

**Cardinal Cesare Baronio (1538-1607) was not declared Venerable until 1745, 138 years after his death - he is still Venerable. **​

---

**Even that pales into insignificance compared to the stats for St. Boethius. He was martyred in 524, & canonised in 1883: a mere 1359 years later **

---

**I hope Origen will be be recognised as a Saint eventually - if ever he were, that would be a new record, as he died in 253/4 of his sufferings endured under persecution, 1754 years ago. **

I’m sure those gentlemen aren’t jealous Not that the Church wouldn’t benefit from those gentlemen being declared saints–the Church only benefits. But I really just don’t share your concern here. Perhaps there’s something to be said for presenting the youth of today with a spiritual hero within, or almost within living memory–someone who they (or we) feel understands the difficulties of growing up in our present strange, advanced, unfeeling culture. So I see where the canonisation of Bl. Theresa or JPII or even St. Pius XII would be, in some ways, more helpful for the youth of today.

Anyway, I’m sure whatever happens, it will cause no fights in Heaven. THe Vatican sets its own criteria. I’m just glad the Holy Spirit will not allow the Holy Father to proclaim error in this!

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I think using the term, “fast tracking,” is misleading and the style the secular media uses.

The only thing being done with the canonization of John Paul II, is that he case is being looked at ahead of others.

However, the process for canonization will be the same and with the same scrutiny.

Also, because so many people knew John Paul II, and have written about him, he has an army of witnesses flooding Rome with documentation, that others do not have.

If you look at various canonized saints, their canonization had a lot to do with how many people knew them, and could vouch for their holiness in life.

St. Theresa, was canonized, faster than others, because when she died, she left behind 4 sisters, who were nuns, writing to Rome on her behalf. Also, because of her young age, the Church had less years of her life, to investigate.

So, with John Paul II and even Mother Teresa, much has to do with their popularity, but more to do with the number of witness that are still alive, who knew them. Also, there enemies are still alive and their writings and protest are also looked at by the Vatican.

Either way, the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, will do the right thing in the case of John Paul II’s, canonization.

We should be happy that we got to see a Saint in our life time.

I believe he will be canonized and I will have a devotion to him, when it happens.

Jim

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Perhaps we should get back to basics.

What is a saint?

My understanding is that a saint is a person who goes straight to heaven upon death.

The process of being declared a saint is to make sure that the individual is in fact in heaven as best as we on earth can tell.

So far, so good?

Now, in terms of sheer numbers of dead Catholics and the number of canonized saints, are we to assume that heaven is a ghost town (no pun intended)? I mean what is the ratio of saints to dead Catholics?

Are we to assume that by slowing down the canonization process that there will be fewer saints? Let’s face it just because the Church has never gotten around to saying that Origen is a Saint doesn’t mean that he didn’t go straight to heaven and has been interceding on our behalf ever since. Or that many unknown child martyrs aren’t there with him doing the same.

Then let us consider those Holy Souls in Purgatory who have passed into the beatific vision. They are in heaven, they are interceding on our behalf. While they may never be elevated to sainthood does not mean that they are not also working miracles for us here on earth. In fact, and this only just occurred to me, a slower process could mean that souls who did not go straight to heaven might have time to pass from purgatory to heaven, do a few miracles and be named a saint just because we took so long.

To my mind, and I have been obviously wrong before, one of the main reasons for canonizing saints is that not only does it give us examples to emulate, but it is a constant celebration of the unity of the Church on earth with the Church in heaven and a reminder of our part in it both now and in the future.

John Paul the Great was criticized for huge numbers of saints he elevated, but I think he knew that this celebration of these souls’ victory strengthened the Church on earth. So I say, “You go, Pope.”

 

[Lepanto]

But what if the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, upon completing JP2’s investigation, says “No” ??

Believe it or not, it is possible.

What would the public reaction be? Would JP2’s admirers accept the decision?

 

[edward_george]

I’m still wondering why we haven’t canonized Leo XIII yet…

-ACEGC

 

[lampstand]

There are some people who are regarded as saints even though they lived prior to the implementation of the formal canonization process. These people in the days of the very early Church aren’t less saintly-- there used to be an element of the process or claim called the acclaim of the people, or something to that effect. Meaning, if there were a cult of adoration, the people reported calling on the saint for intercession and they received such, etc., the person was then looked on as a saint by the Church without having to “go backwards” through the process of a trial. Did we have canonization hearings for St. Patrick? How about for the Apostles? I don’t think they had to wait…

 

[Eilish_Maura]

But what if the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, upon completing JP2’s investigation, says “No” ??

Believe it or not, it is possible.

What would the public reaction be? Would JP2’s admirers accept the decision?

Why is it possible? Do you know something the rest of us don’t know?

 

[pprimeau1976]

Yeah I do. Much as I do with Mother Theresa. Both are magnificent example of humankind. But there are many other magnificent examples who do not enjoy their level of PR and that seems terribly unfair.

Is fairness something that we even need to be concerned about? Who do we need to apply fairness to? The candidates for sainthood? They’re most likely in heaven and probably could care less if we recognize the fact.

I have no problem with someone being fast-tracked to sainthood. The process is not as stringent as it used to be, but it still is alot more stringent than the early centuries.

We still have to wait for some miracles to occur and be approved. With the exception of confirming the miracle, you can’t fast-track a miracle. God works miracles on his own time!

 

[Lepanto]

Why is it possible?

Because the raison d’être of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints is to investigate and render decisions.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I’m still wondering why we haven’t canonized Leo XIII yet…

-ACEGC

Wasn’t there an issue where Pope Leo had a Jewish boy removed from his parents, because some one had Baptized the Child, without the parents permission, but being he was then considered Catholic, the Pope ordered the kidnapping in order that the child would be raised Catholic, or was this a different Pope?

Jim

 

[Spirithound]

But what if the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, upon completing JP2’s investigation, says “No” ??

Believe it or not, it is possible.

What would the public reaction be? Would JP2’s admirers accept the decision?

Have they ever said no before? Intuitively, it seems that a “no” might be interpreted as “definitely in hell”. The more prudent thing to do might be to put it on the backburner.
But anyways, this is why I believe you are confusing two matters here. We’re 2 years away from the end of the would-be waiting period for JPII. Surely the Congregation is not going to finish their investigation before then. If it takes them 5 more years, and his cult is still as powerful as it is today, then clearly the popular acclaim has nothing to do with a waiting period.

 

[Al_Masetti]

It has been customary to wait 50 years after a person’s death before canonizing that person. It allows time for all of the relevant information to emerge.

No reason not to follow that procedure in the case of Pope John Paul II. We have no shortage of heroes and saints to emulate.

If memory serves, St. Thomas Aquinas was canonized in 49 years. But he was the exception.

 

[anamchara]

[Edited]

I do not feel uncomfortable at all about this. I trust our Church to make the right decisions with regards to such matters.

 

[Lepanto]

 

[down_under]

[Edited]

and his or her chief like minded defender has spoken. “the congregation say no…” thats funny. It’s not even a yes or know question. it is a yes or maybe question. No one has ever been canonized to hell. which weather you meant it or not is what you suggested. IT is a yes or maybe…a yes or we don’t know for sure question. there is no no