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

[catharina]

My point all through this thread is that we although shouldn’t deny anything if it’s valid, but likewise we shouldn’t presume anything. Too many people have presumed sainthood and already canonized JP2 in their own minds.

I say you pulled such a notion straiight out of the air.
Too many people?
Five, a hundred, thousands, a million?

How we feel about it has no bearing on our reponse in faith.
Do I feel uncomforatble abvout a so-called fast tracking?
I feel nothing about it.

I don’t even think about it - or I didn’t 'til you posted this distasteful thread.

 

[Joysong]

Joysong:

… but if the Holy Spirit desires to elevate him speedily to the ranks of the saints, who can oppose it?

Lepanto, kindly read my post again. Do you honestly believe the word “if” denotes reading the mind of the Holy Spirit? As you said, it is in the hands of the Congregation. Then why all the fuss?

Joysong:

Your cautionary comments suggest, IMO, an deep hesitation to see this title bestowed upon him.

Yes, I stated “IMO” because of the negative tone of your post title. It did not say, do you feel [excited, happy, eager, etc.] but rather, do you feel “uncomfortable.” That in itself reflects your own feelings and I suspect you thought that others might agree … again, “IMO.” If they did not agree, you were prepared with your ‘cautions’ to change their minds.

And the very word fast-tracked is indicative of your true sentiment.

I know of another thread by the same title that was very disrespectful of John Paul, and two posters were banned from the forum over it. It is easy to think that the old thread was resurrected, along with the same negativity.

I apologize sincerely if I am wrong, but you did not give us reason to believe otherwise.

 

[peary]

I for one would love to see the canonization of Pope John Paul II during my life time. I do believe it will be forthcoming.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

I for one never thought that I would see the canonization of either Padre Pio or Mother Teresa in my lifetime. I was very happy!

 

[Lepanto]

“VATICAN CITY, May 22 (UPI) – Pope John Paul II could be beatified by next spring, possibly in time for the fourth anniversary of his death, a cardinal at the Vatican predicts.”

So much for a five year “cooling off” period. Looks like preferential treatment and potentially a rush-job to meet the four-year anniversary. Why not just canonize him now? After all, we all know it’s inevitable.

upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/05/22/sainthood_sought_for_pope_john_paul_ii/3182/

 

[catharina]

“VATICAN CITY, May 22 (UPI) – Pope John Paul II could be beatified by next spring, possibly in time for the fourth anniversary of his death, a cardinal at the Vatican predicts.”

So much for a five year “cooling off” period. Looks like preferential treatment and potentially a rush-job to meet the four-year anniversary. Why not just canonize him now? After all, we all know it’s inevitable.

upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/05/22/sainthood_sought_for_pope_john_paul_ii/3182/

This fast track reminds me of nothing more than a return to traditionalism of ages past - when Saints were declared by popular acclamation. I have no complaints about it

 

[redrosetea]

I agree canonize him now. I can’t imagine anyone not thinking he was a saint…and if they did, on what grounds do they base their opinion?

 

[DustinsDad]

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.

As canonization is merely the Church’s recognition that a soul is in heaven (having been purified in Purgatory if necessary), I am not really concerned about his eventual canonization, if such materializes. I certainly hope Pope John Paul II makes it there, if not already.

I am, however, all for the proper procedures for it - prudentially approaching things slowly is a good thing. One of the things one must unergo in these circumstances is a thorough evaluation of all the writings of the person up for canonization. JP2 was a volumous writer, and not the most clear…some things do need to be really looked at (since not everything a pope writes falls under the umbrella of infallibility, it isn’t beyond comprehension that there might have been some theological errors in some of his stuff), as such, I think it would take some time here, just given common sense, to evaluate such a volume of writings and such a long pontificate.

But again, an eventual canonization is a good thing for anyone, especially someone as well known as Pope John Paul II - anytime a soul makes it to heaven - who’s going to argue with that???

I have more reservations about the title “The Great” being applied as an official title. The circumstances of his pontificate doesn’t seem to fall under this particular and rare title given previously to very very few popes. I could go into detail, but it doesn’t seem to be the question being asked.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[peary]

“VATICAN CITY, May 22 (UPI) – Pope John Paul II could be beatified by next spring, possibly in time for the fourth anniversary of his death, a cardinal at the Vatican predicts.”

So much for a five year “cooling off” period. Looks like preferential treatment and potentially a rush-job to meet the four-year anniversary. Why not just canonize him now? After all, we all know it’s inevitable.

]

**SANTO SUBITO!!! **

 

[peary]

I have more reservations about the title “The Great” being applied as an official title. The circumstances of his pontificate doesn’t seem to fall under this particular and rare title given previously to very very few popes. I could go into detail, but it doesn’t seem to be the question being asked.

Wow…show me a pope who had the type of positive effect on the Church as John Paul II. Very rarely, if EVER, do we have such a wonderful and blessed holy father. I don’t see what could be questioned about it. I will always see him as John Paul “the Great.”

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

**SANTO SUBITO!!! **

Prayers s& blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[Sure]

As canonization is merely the Church’s recognition that a soul is in heaven (having been purified in Purgatory if necessary), I am not really concerned about his eventual canonization, if such materializes. I certainly hope Pope John Paul II makes it there, if not already.

I am, however, all for the proper procedures for it - prudentially approaching things slowly is a good thing. One of the things one must unergo in these circumstances is a thorough evaluation of all the writings of the person up for canonization. JP2 was a volumous writer, and not the most clear…some things do need to be really looked at (since not everything a pope writes falls under the umbrella of infallibility, it isn’t beyond comprehension that there might have been some theological errors in some of his stuff), as such, I think it would take some time here, just given common sense, to evaluate such a volume of writings and such a long pontificate.

But again, an eventual canonization is a good thing for anyone, especially someone as well known as Pope John Paul II - anytime a soul makes it to heaven - who’s going to argue with that???

I have more reservations about the title “The Great” being applied as an official title. The circumstances of his pontificate doesn’t seem to fall under this particular and rare title given previously to very very few popes. I could go into detail, but it doesn’t seem to be the question being asked.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

If there were errors in his writing, it would have been exposed by now by reputable theologians and scholars. Obviously, it has been found to be accurate and faithful.

 

[peary]

If there were errors in his writing, it would have been exposed by now by reputable theologians and scholars. Obviously, it has been found to be accurate and faithful.

I am an avid reader of the writings of John Paul and I have yet to find anything contrary to the Faith in any of it. In fact, his deep theological insights are an absolute treasure and reveals a closeness to the Holy Spirit that is unique in the history of the papacy.

 

[Sure]

I am an avid reader of the writings of John Paul and I have yet to find anything contrary to the Faith in any of it. In fact, his deep theological insights are an absolute treasure and reveals a closeness to the Holy Spirit that is unique in the history of the papacy.

And your assessment is correct. All the reputable orthodox theologians agree, his writings are 100% in line with traditional Church teaching…and they have been thoroughly vetted. I would bet that far more critical (in the literary sense) books and articles have been written on JP II’s writings than any other Pope in history.

He will be canonized and declared a Doctor of the Church within the next 10 years.

 

[Zarathustra89]

Wow…show me a pope who had the type of positive effect on the Church as John Paul II. Very rarely, if EVER, do we have such a wonderful and blessed holy father. I don’t see what could be questioned about it. I will always see him as John Paul “the Great.”

Are you kidding? You obviously know nothing of Church history.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

 

[peary]

Are you kidding? You obviously know nothing of Church history.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Wow, you need a definite lesson in humility.

 

[Zarathustra89]

Wow, you need a definite lesson in humility.

Your lot need to control their emotions.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

 

[DustinsDad]

Wow…show me a pope who had the type of positive effect on the Church as John Paul II.

Well, that’s just it - we need to look at concrete examples of how - and even if - there has been an actual positive effect on the Church. I mean it all comes down to whether one thinks we are in a new springtime, or a state of crisis. I think reality shows the latter.

And it doesn’t matter whether one blames JP2 or society in general for the crisis - the fact is he was unable in a very, very long pontificate to squash certain major problems in the Church.

Very rarely, if EVER, do we have such a wonderful and blessed holy father. I don’t see what could be questioned about it. I will always see him as John Paul “the Great.”

Heh…but the official title of “Great” isn’t just defendant on popularity. The title is given officially only to three popes in Church history - who stood out so clearly in strengthening the Church (in tangible measurable ways), in discipline, and in liturgy, in clarity of teaching the faith, etc…Pope St. Leo I (the Great) (440-61)
newadvent.org/cathen/09154b.htm

Pope St. Gregory I (the Great) (590-604)
newadvent.org/cathen/06780a.htm

Pope St. Nicholas I (the Great) (858-67)
newadvent.org/cathen/11054a.htm
Pope John Paul II was strong in certain areas (holding the line on moral teaching - abortion, contraception, etc.), but in my humble opinion very weak in others (discipline, episcopal appointments, upholding dignified liturgy, and going a wee bit overboard on some ecumenical forays and personal actions which tend to communicate religious indifference). This has nothing to do with his personal sanctity - but it does go to the actual strength or weakness of his pontificate. And this is a totally different question from his popularity.

I tend to agree with this article from This Rock: Will Pope John Paul II Be Styled “the Great”?

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad
%between%

 

[Zarathustra89]

Pope St. Nicholas I (the Great) (858-67)
[Pope John Paul II was strong in certain areas (holding the line on moral teaching - abortion, contraception, etc.), but in my humble opinion very weak in others (discipline, episcopal appointments, upholding dignified liturgy, and going a wee bit overboard on some ecumenical forays and personal actions which tend to communicate religious indifference). This has nothing to do with his personal sanctity - but it does go to the actual strength or weakness of his pontificate. And this is a totally different question from his popularity.

Lets pray the Church can recover from the abuses allowed to fester under his pontificate.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra
[/quote]

 

[peary]

Well, that’s just it - we need to look at concrete examples of how - and even if - there has been an actual positive effect on the Church. I mean it all comes down to whether one thinks we are in a new springtime, or a state of crisis. I think reality shows the latter.

Vatican I was called to contain a state of crisis within the Church, and if you are going to p(name removed by moderator)oint the lasting effects of ‘crisis’ go back to the 19th century. That is why Leo XIII wrote about the evils in society back in 1878, as well as evils in the Church. The Church was already in crisis in Europe which came to a head after the Second Vatican Council. The Church in the United States only began to experience this crisis openly in the 1950s and after Vatican II, but it began long before then.

And it doesn’t matter whether one blames JP2 or society in general for the crisis - the fact is he was unable in a very, very long pontificate to squash certain major problems in the Church.

Show me a time where there weren’t major problems in the Church!

Heh…but the official title of “Great” isn’t just defendant on popularity. The title is given officially only to three popes in Church history - who stood out so clearly in strengthening the Church (in tangible measurable ways), in discipline, and in liturgy, in clarity of teaching the faith, etc…Pope St. Leo I (the Great) (440-61), Pope St. Gregory I (the Great) (590-604), Pope St. Nicholas I (the Great) (858-67).

Pope John Paul II was strong in certain areas (holding the line on moral teaching - abortion, contraception, etc.), but in my humble opinion very weak in others (discipline, episcopal appointments, upholding dignified liturgy, and going a wee bit overboard on some ecumenical forays and personal actions which tend to communicate religious indifference). This has nothing to do with his personal sanctity - but it does go to the actual strength or weakness of his pontificate. And this is a totally different question from his popularity.

**As I said in a previous post, I am an avid reader of the writings of John Paul II, and you will not find anything controversial or questionable in any of them. In fact, his deep theological insight will be felt throughout the Church for hundreds of years. He may not be canonized as ‘great’ but he will assume that title, I am sure, as history proceeds. **
IDustinsDad
]

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed.