Infallibility of Papal and Non-Papal canonizations

  • Thread starter Thread starter OrbisNonSufficit
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

OrbisNonSufficit

Guest
I was looking at this from historical viewpoint. There are some facts I am concerned about:
  1. Popes were not ones canonizing Saints for first millennium at least. That would mean Church did not hold Papal need to do so, nor sought his special approval. At the same time, Eastern Churches did not automatically accept Saints venerated in Rome, hence it seems like canonizations made even by Roman Pontiff are not infallible, or historically weren’t explicitly viewed as different to canonizations done by others.
  2. Even if we take inerrancy of Roman Church (as held by East pre-Schism) into account, Patriarch Photius was indeed venerated in Rome. Now he is not a Saint of Latin Church (and we can disagree with him being in Saint and can hold opinions on this) and hence his canonization was not infallible, even if he was indeed venerated in Rome. This would prove that canonization of Photius was not infallible, or that we are required to accept his canonization even now.
  3. St. Gregory Palamases veneration has been condemned by Rome before, but now his veneration is allowed. This was mostly due to his theology being misinterpreted (I guess). However, that would mean Rome has erred on declaring someone NOT to be a Saint. I don’t think this is a strong point but I’ll include it.
  4. There is nothing explicit stating canonizations are infallible…
however…
  1. Canonizations impact daily life of Chuch, Church calendar, names of Church buildings and also liturgy. That would mean canonizations are part of rule of prayer (“we pray as we believe”) and since faith of Church is infallible, canonizations must be infallible too. Church also can not err in disciplinary actions (She can not make disciplinary decisions that would endanger well-being of souls), which further shows that canonizations are without error.
  2. Canonizations would technically be at least part of ordinary magisterium of the Church. That would mean they are binding if done by Bishops in communion with Roman Pontiff in their authority too. Technically this would also make local pre-schism canonizations infallible (?)
Please, if anyone could help me out, it would be appreciated…
 
Last edited:
Canonization is never declared to be, or held to be an absolute certainty, but rather declared to a moral certainty. That is nuanced, but there is a difference.

Practically, we cannot and will not know with complete surety in this life.
 
I see. Thank you, that would probably adress all my points at the same time 😃

What would be practical difference between moral and absolute certainty in this situation? Can theoretically Church de-canonize a Saint? Can one privately hold opinion that canonized Saint is not really in Heaven?
 
Not a good position to take IMO, as you might then find yourself opposing the moral judgment of the Church (in principle, similar to Gamaliel’s words to the council in Acts 5:33-39). As well you would need evidence above and beyond thoughts or feelings to demonstrate that the Saint was, in fact, not. It is extremely difficult to prove a negative.

If you have difficulty with certain canonizations, it might be best to dig a little into that Saint’s life and into the arguments used in favor of canonization.
 
po18guy said:
If you have difficulty with certain canonizations, it might be best to dig a little into that Saint’s life and into the arguments used in favor of canonization.
Click to expand...
Thank you, but I do not really have a problem with canonization of any Saint. I am mostly asking in general principle, as I was under impression that canonizations were not infallible but then on different thread I was somehow provided link that tried proving infallibility of canonizations from implicit sources… now I am mostly asking to understand it better 🙂
po18guy said:
Not a good position to take IMO, as you might then find yourself opposing the moral judgment of the Church
Click to expand...
Thank you, I am aware of that. I do not want to go proving someone not being a Saint neither do I wish to publicly (or privately) go against canonizations, but for the sake of thread and fact we are discussing this on public forum that can be read by anyone, I am glad you mentioned passage in the Scripture as well as for advice about position of doing so.
 
Ok, I am more clear now. The Church cannot/will not declare infallibly that someone is in heaven. For that reason, canonizations are held to the standard of a moral certainty.

Absolute knowledge will arrive only when we have answered the Lord’s final call.
 
In the early Church canonizations were up to the local Bishop. Then right after the Great Schism up until 1634 a.d. the Latin Church canonized saints by local Council without the explicit approval of the Holy See. After 1634 the Pope reserved all canonizations to the Papacy according to Catholic Encyclopedia:

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm

Of course Catholic Encyclopedia has very ultramontane tendencies so, this characterization could be more in favor of the development of solo papal canonization.

On a side note the Orthodox also canonize at the highest level via Synod of Bishops and simultaneous glorification as in the case of St. Herman of Alaska being simultaneously glorified liturgically by both the OCA and ROCOR.


http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/theology/81-theology/74-infallability-of-canonizations.html

I seem to not be able to find any definite documents either from the Catholic or Orthodox side that supports the idea that canonizations are infallible, but oral tradition seems to point towards them being considered semi-infallible.

The Orthodox also have a way of accepting someone as a saint for the holiness of their life while not following any teachings that stray from the consensus of the Fathers.
 
The canonization process was reformed a couple of times, with a declaration that canonizations before a specific date are accepted. “Equipollent” canonizations like that are generally not counted as infallible.

The modern process is from the 18th century. It is a cumbersome journey that usually takes many years. Making it through the process is so miraculous, there had to be some supernatural force involved! The declarations issued at the end of this process are considered infallible by some because they are definitive.
 
OrbisNonSufficit said:
Can theoretically Church de-canonize a Saint?
Click to expand...
Others on this thread are more knowledgeable than me on this topic, but I think its theoretically possible. I do not think it has ever happened. I believe the Church has stopped observing the feast days of certain Saints because of doubts as to whether the person ever existed, however. (e.g. St. Christopher)
 
Last edited:
Much of what I said is based on Making Saints by Ken Woodward, or rather, my addled memory of it. I hope what I said is accurate, but Woodward is the best source I know of on the subject.
 
From my limited unerstanding, if a canonization has been made by anyone else than the bishop of Rome, it is not infallible. But if it the bishop of Rome who declared someone a saint, then, according to the church teaching about the successor of Simon having the same authority to bind and loose in heaven, this canonization is infallible.
 
I believe there is many persons who weren’t Catholics but are in Heaven.
But refering to OP’s “Infallibillity of Non-Papal Canonisations” at the same time I know couple unfortunate examples from Serbian Orthodox Church where some persons are declared saint in their Church and people pray to them but Catholic Church in Croatia strongly rejects it because of war crimes over civilians and other negative things (Connection between Croatia and Serbia in this is WW II. and very wished canonisation of our Cardinal bl. Alojsius Stepinac).
So here is translated one part of text, you can also read it with translator on browser.
Narod.hr is reliable and truthful source in Croatia.
"Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?"
In the end we will mention two saints of Serbian Orthodox Church. Milorad Vukojicic and Nikolai Velimirovic.
Milorad Vukojicic(1917,.-1945.), called priest Maca or priest Cutthroat, was montenegrian priest of Serbian Orthodox Church, leader of chetnicks black trio in War World II. After war he was sentenced death penalty and executed. He was declared saint of Serbian Orthodox Church in 2005.
Nikolai Velimirovic(1881.-1956.) was bishop of Serbian Orthodox Church, christian theologian and serbian-nqcional ideologist. He was founder of conservative politics ideology of svetosavski nacionalism.
He is considered to be spiritual inspirator Ljotic’s organisation ZBOR. Often criticised for Anti-Semitic attitudes. Personally he has got high ranking Hitler’s medal for his support against Jews in Serbia. Serbian Orthodox Church declared him saint in 2003.in Belgrade and since then he is celebrated as saint Nikolai Zicki.
Nikolai Velimirovic’s critics criticise him for an attempt to compare the works of Saint Sava and Adolf Hitler, as well as anti-Semitism.
https://narod.hr/kultura/video-sto-...atolicima-oluji-jasenovcu-srbima-u-crnoj-gori
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
As I recall, it was Fr. Mitch Pacwa. I can try to dig it up, but I might die of old age.
 
Last edited:
To absolutely reserve to Rome would violate the terms of Brest and Uhzrod.

That said, Eastern Catholic Churches generally refer canonizations to Rome, as it is seen as more “prestigious” to have Roman canonization.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top