P
paul_c
Guest
I agree. This is the only way it will work…
- Status
S
sidbrown
Guest
I don’t see it. Here’s why: Eastern Orthodox now are allowed to receive Holy Communion in Roman Catholic Churches, and no such requirement as accepting all Catholic saints is imposed.
P
paul_c
Guest
Your point was that the EO refuse to reunite with the Catholics unless the Catholics remove some of the canonized saints. This will not happen (and I doubt that the EO pushes it either)
S
Spirithound
Guest
The EO also don’t accept papal primacy, infallibility, or immediate jurisdiction, but that would clearly have to change, right?
S
sidbrown
Guest
I am not sure if it would. For example, I don’t think that the EO would ever accept a policy where the Roman Pope would choose their bishops.
Anyway, with reference to whether or not canonisations are infallible, I don;t think it is a clearcut issue.
J
josephdaniel29
Guest
And maybe, just maybe; if you’re really nice, it may be possible for Roman Catholics to receive permission to continue to venerate saints not recognized by the Orthodox.
M
michael_legna
Guest
This idea of infallible canonizations seems contrary to what I have always been taught about the Church and the judgment of salvation - mainly that the Church does not judge anyone’s salvation. To say infallibly that someone is a saint is to say infallibly that this same person is saved and in heaven. Thus we are saying as a Church that we do judge some men’s salvation.
I was always taught that saint lives as we knew them were held up as examples for us to follow but not that they were guaranteed to be in heaven. Salvation was left up to Christ as only He can see the intent in a persons heart and that is what the judgment is based on.
CCC 682 When he comes at the end of time to judge the living and the dead, the glorious Christ will reveal the secret disposition of hearts and will render to each man according to his works, and according to his acceptance or refusal of grace.
No one on earth can see the secret disposition of the heart.
679 Christ is Lord of eternal life. Full right to pass definitive judgment on the works and hearts of men belongs to him as redeemer of the world. He “acquired” this right by his cross. The Father has given “all judgment to the Son”. Yet the Son did not come to judge, but to save and to give the life he has in himself. By rejecting grace in this life, one already judges oneself, receives according to one’s works, and can even condemn oneself for all eternity by rejecting the Spirit of love.
We cannot judge men by external appearances because some are whitewashed tombs full of dead men’s bones. Yes we assign a “devils advocate” to dig into the persons life but if they are not infallible then there could be things we miss and it is possible even the worst men can repent on their death bed and so it is possible even the best can recant (even internally) and contain as their last intent a mortal sin.
I don’t see how this can be both possible and consistent with Catholic teaching. If someone knows please explain it to me.
I was always taught that saint lives as we knew them were held up as examples for us to follow but not that they were guaranteed to be in heaven. Salvation was left up to Christ as only He can see the intent in a persons heart and that is what the judgment is based on.
CCC 682 When he comes at the end of time to judge the living and the dead, the glorious Christ will reveal the secret disposition of hearts and will render to each man according to his works, and according to his acceptance or refusal of grace.
No one on earth can see the secret disposition of the heart.
679 Christ is Lord of eternal life. Full right to pass definitive judgment on the works and hearts of men belongs to him as redeemer of the world. He “acquired” this right by his cross. The Father has given “all judgment to the Son”. Yet the Son did not come to judge, but to save and to give the life he has in himself. By rejecting grace in this life, one already judges oneself, receives according to one’s works, and can even condemn oneself for all eternity by rejecting the Spirit of love.
We cannot judge men by external appearances because some are whitewashed tombs full of dead men’s bones. Yes we assign a “devils advocate” to dig into the persons life but if they are not infallible then there could be things we miss and it is possible even the worst men can repent on their death bed and so it is possible even the best can recant (even internally) and contain as their last intent a mortal sin.
I don’t see how this can be both possible and consistent with Catholic teaching. If someone knows please explain it to me.
M
michael_legna
Guest
That would only be a risk IF the Church’s doctrine of Salvation depended on the outward appearances of an individual, but that is not my understanding of the Church’s doctrine. The Catholic Church does not teach salvation is based just an heroic outward appearance. It is based on grace and faith and works (but not only just any works, but works done in love - or in other words works done with the right intention). That last is the problem with any judgment of salvation done by men - we cannot know the intention of another. They may have been doing these heroic actions not out of love but in an effort to earn salvation and so they would be worthless. It is always the intent and not the act itself which is important and we cannot know what that intent is, only Christ can see into a man’s heart in that manner.
P
paul_c
Guest
My understanding of this is that the church doesn’t actually judge the saints, per se, but recognizes that they are in heaven by virtue of the miracles done in their names. That is why their is a miracle criteria. But I am no expert in this…
S
Spirithound
Guest
The Pope of Rome had little to nothing to do with selecting bishops outside of his general area for centuries. I don’t see the current practice as a necessary function of any papal dogma.
S
Spirithound
Guest
The Church does not declare anyone to be in hell. Nor does the Church judge anyone. The Church can, in certain cases discern whether a certain person is in Heaven (but not whether the person is not in Heaven). We can have faith in the process of canonization because it is not a natural process. Just like all infallible statements, it is only under the divine protection from error that it can be discerned.
M
michael_legna
Guest
Thanks Paul C and Spirithound you answers helped alot and I spoke with my local Priest and a Deacon and they pretty much gave me the same answers as you provided. It makes a lot more sense now.
ML
ML
S
sidbrown
Guest
Really? I thought that the Church has always maintained that Satan and Lucifer were in hell.
T
thistle
Guest
For a start Satan and Lucifer are the same, and secondly Satan is not a human.
The Church does not declare any human to be in Hell.
S
sidbrown
Guest
Satan is not a human, but he is someone who is in hell.
Further, if you had read the book: Summa Daemoniaca: Tratado de Demonología y Manual de Exorcistas by José Antonio Fortea Cucurull, you would know that Father José Antonio Fortea and Father Amorth say that Lucifer and Satan are different beings.
T
thistle
Guest
The Church teaching on not declaring anyone specific in Hell applies to humans and not the fallen angels.
Satan and Lucifer are the SAME!! We use these names/words interchangeably.
Modern Catholic Dictionary:
LUCIFER. The name is sometimes applied to a king of Babylon (Isaiah 14:12), but the Fathers of the Church commonly identify Lucifer with Satan, leader of the fallen angels. In the Church’s writings it is a synonym for the devil, the Prince of Darkness, who before he fell was an angel of light. In the Scriptures, Christ is also called Phosphoros – Light-Bearer (II Peter 1:19). (Etym. Latin lucifer, light-bearer.)
S
sidbrown
Guest
This is not infallible Catholic teaching that they refer to the same person. As I pointed out, Catholic scholars have said not.
P
paul_c
Guest
Out of curiosity, What do your Catholic scholars say about Lucifer and Satan. who are they and what are there relative roles? I’ve never heard that anyone said they were separate beings (not persons, for sure, right?)
T
thistle
Guest
By the way Catholic scholars have not said that. That implies all of them are in agreement. Maybe some but they are in small minority.
Nobody said it was an infallible teaching. Where did you get that idea?
You must be naive if someone talks about Lucifer and you don’t think they are talking about the devil. Are you really trying to tell us that if you hear a person talking about Satan then they are talking about the devil but if you hear a person talking about Lucifer you think they are talking about someone else.
S
sidbrown
Guest
I have already explained it above, that there are Catholic scholars who say that Lucifer and Satan are not the same entity. Father José Antonio Fortea and Father Amorth, say that Lucifer and Satan are different beings. This is explained in the book: Summa Daemoniaca: Tratado de Demonología by Father Jose Fortea. You should buy the book and read what he says. See:
elasesinoeraelcriado.blogspot.com/
Summa Daemoniaca es el más completo tratado de demonología que existe hoy día en la Iglesia Católica. Escrito en el siglo XXI, ha sido pensado para ser usado en seminarios y universidades….
And of course, there are other non-Catholic sources which say the same thing. See for example, the article: Is Satan “Lucifer"? by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.
apologeticspress.org/articles/2215
- Status