Is Canonization of popes for name sake? And what about Mother Teresa?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 3335
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LumineDiei said:
No!! The problem is with them, as individuals and as a group. It’s called pride. They refuse to serve.
Click to expand...
Yes. Catholics nowadays are so focused on the sins of the flesh and in particular sexual sin. They forget that pride is actually THE biggest and worst sin of all, according to Catholic teaching. Pride is what caused Satan to rebel against God. Satan didn’t do that because he wanted illicit sex (angels don’t have sex) or material goods (he didn’t need them). He wanted things his own way and he didn’t want to serve God or have God as his authority.

Those who rebel against the Church often frame it as themselves being holier and more correct, but they aren’t. They’re just full of pride. They think they don’t need to follow the authority of God’s established church. They are wrong.
 
Last edited:
When the modern process for canonizing saints was established (in 1740s or earlier) the rule was to wait 50 years before beginning. There was wisdom to that, as it gave some perspective on the life of the saint. False devotions fell out of favor while true devotion thrived.

When St JP2 revised the process, the waiting period was either cut to 5 years, or quietly shelved. The saint who died in 1970 is often not as significant to the people today as he might have been shortly after he died. (Padre Pio is an example of one who is still significant to many 50 years after his death). The impulse was to recognize the many people dying in circumstances close to today’s people.

When St JP2 died, the people who assess sanctity prior to canonization were all familiar with him and knew his life. Led by the men who been made Cardinals by him, the Church waived whatever waiting period still existed. Santo Subito was the cry, Saint Immediately and such a popular acclamation was often part of the process. It was a conscious decision not to wait, because waiting was not needed. (It is remarkable that the Cardinals were unified in their support of him; that is often not the case)

Canonization is a process for recognizing the impact a person has on others in the Church. The strong voice of support for St JP2 or Mother Teresa is exactly the kind of sign canonization seeks. Sometimes it becomes obvious after growing for some years, as it did with Cardinal Newman. And sometimes it is obvious immediately.
 
Jen7 said:
I don’t understand why people on this forum jump down folks’ throats for asking questions. The OP didn’t insult anyone. He asked a question. Isn’t that why we’re all here?
Click to expand...
Respectful way of asking question: “Was it perhaps a mistake to canonize Pope John Paul II so fast when we see by the McCarrick report that he may have known about sexual abuse and did nothing?”

Disrespectful way of asking question: Say that there was “nothing holy in the life” of Popes, ask if they were just canonized so stuff could be named after them, and finish by asking why Mother Teresa was canonized like “a bullet train” even though she’s completely irrelevant to the McCarrick report.

Rude.

This forum has a high standard for civility. Plus, this person identifies on their profile as a Catholic. He’s not some unbeliever who’s totally unfamiliar with the concept of saints. He could have framed his question in a polite way. He chose to be abrasive and then fall back on the “I was only asking a question!” defense. . . .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
3335 said:
Pope John Paul ii knew that he shared a bed with young seminarians.
Click to expand...
No, he did not, at least that we can know, barring omniscience. There is a huge confusion that notification of an accusation somehow imparts instant knowledge.
3335 said:
I also love Pope John Paul II , Mother Treasa .
But I was seeing some sedevacantist videos
Click to expand...
If you want to know what the Church teaches, then go to the Church not those splitting off from the Church. It is like talking to an ex-wife to find out what her husband was like after a nasty divorce.
3335 said:
Why there is Sedevacantism ?
Click to expand...
My opinion? Mostly pride. The same thing that has caused people to split from the Church, at its heart, is always an excessive elevation of one’s opinion. The Church has had splits and infiltrators since the time of the apostles. St. Paul warned us of this. Even Jesus had Judas. And even Saint Peter did some pretty screwing things, including one doctrinal goof.

My advise is to look at the big picture - the Church from the beginning. All that is happening today is a re-run of what has happened throughout history.
 
Last edited:
His question is still posted and I and others substantively responded to it.

We’re not required to treat every question with kid gloves. A badly asked question is a badly asked question. It should be called out so the question can be phrased better next time. This is how people learn social skills and posting skills. Additionally, a poster who uses English idioms like “Bullet train” is not struggling with the language barrier.
 
Last edited:
Hey @3335,

I appreciated your question. I think you have the wrong idea about canonization. Canonized saints are saints that have some particular quality or qualities that are worthy of emulation, and which the Church holds up for our edification. The saints were not perfect, and they leave much to be desired in comparison to the perfection we find in Jesus.

There is no teaching in the Church that those who have been canonized have never been guilty even of grave fault. Also remember that the canonized saints were just human, and their holiness pales in comparison to that of our Lord.

My favorite saint is John XXIII. He was a great man. I’m sure he did much that was not good.

Also it is true that there have been many high-profile cases of expedited canonizations in the past, but that is OK. There is nothing fishy about that. The Church changes her disciplines through time. There was a time when it was customary for people to get baptized at the end of their lives, or when the sacrament of Penance was much more public than it is now. Besides which, thanks to communications technology, the good works of saints like John Paul II are on display to the world in a way they have never been before.

Keep also in mind that the process of canonization is mediated by human conditions. What I mean by this is that canonization requires that you have a group of people who are going to advocate for your canonization after you die. How many Carthusian saints do you know of? There is a very small number, because the Carthusian Order does not make any effort to advocate for the canonization of its members. A Pope, or a Jesuit, or Franciscan, will have many people ready to get hands-on and petition the Church for further steps.

The example of the saints is just an aid in the spiritual life. Take what good you can from the saints, and ignore the rest.
 
So if a Saint is found guilty in crimes, etc then his sainthood would be removed from him?
 
I couldn’t watch the whole Mother Teresa clip due to time constraints BUT it did not sound like a bad image to me (the part I heard). It listed some issues she was against - abortion and divorce-and-remarriage, and contraception. That may sound un-loving to non-Christians but to Catholics it’s par for the course. And regarding the level of medical care - she never tried to pass herself off as a doctor. She just peeled one person at a time off the street and helped them die with care and kindness. I know there are allegations about some of her nuns & those actions are not okay… but they hardly seem like M. Teresa’s fault.
 
Last edited:
You do know that when you are put on ignore, the person ignoring can choose to see your individual post, or not? It doesn’t mean your stuff just blanks completely.
 
Last edited:
I am not aware of this ever happening, and I do not believe so, no.

The point is that the saints, each in his or her own way, gave us an example of a life lived in obedience to grace. That is it. It does not follow from this that everything they did was free of serious fault.
 
bruisedreed said:
I am not aware of this ever happening, and I do not believe so, no.

The point is that the saints, each in his or her own way, gave us an example of a life lived in obedience to grace. That is it. It does not follow from this that everything they did was free of serious fault.
Click to expand...
Ok, Thanks for Answering.
 
Jen7 said:
48.png
Tis_Bearself:
You should not insult great saints like Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand why people on this forum jump down folks’ throats for asking questions. The OP didn’t insult anyone. He asked a question. Isn’t that why we’re all here?
Click to expand...
To be charitable: because some people on this forum might be trying — in their own words — to help other members of this forum to steer clear of the sins of detraction and calumny.
 
There’s a great need to understand the concept of holiness, which is heroic charity. That is, saints are those who strove to love and serve God and others with their whole hearts, going to a heroic degree in seeking the will of God and doing it. It has little to do with human error; being human, we are all subject to error in many ways, and sometimes in saints’ lives God allows this, often to produce in them more humility. Sainthood also has little or nothing to do with human accomplishments such as in the case of a pope being efficient at the job. Holiness is a completely different thing. Many people have no concept of it because they’ve never thought about it or think it is impossible to achieve.
Clearly, both John Paul II and Mother Teresa exhibited heroic charity in their lives.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top