The “Church” which notices people’s lives is surely in regular, at least weekly, touch with every devout Catholic. When you say “Church” in this context brother do you really mean “Rome”?
Not at all. It’s the local Church. No process can begin without the consent of the local bishop. By the time a case gets to Rome, the research has been completed by the postulator. The postulator is chosen by the local bishop where the person died.
I would have thought the exact opposite was the case. If a person lived in a small village (the typical living condition of most Catholics over most centuries) it would be very easy indeed to find out all about their lives.
This is where time is crucial and why Pope John Paul shortened the process. In many cases the candidate does not have any great writings that you study, nor have there been stories written about him. You have to rely on anecdotes, for example, St. Giana Molla. She was a physician, not a theologian. However, there were enough people alive who could testify to her holiness and who could be interrogated and cross examined. If you let your eye witnesses die, then you have nothing to work with.
I accept that lobbying and campaigning is not sufficient for cannonization. But there is a lot to suggest it is necessary.
Actually, it’s prohibitted by the Sacred Congregation for the Causes of Saints. They will listen to the voice of the people, but not to lobbyists.
But surely some people not monarchs or martyrs or the parents of saints should be cannonized from time to time (or even a couple of times a century) if the practice is to be seen as actually recognizing heroic Christian virtue, rather than fame + status + heroic Christian virtue?
You cannot canonize just to keep the numbers balanced. You can only canonize when the pope knows for sure that a person is in heaven. For him to know this he has to have known the person himself or must have enough information that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the person lived a heroic Christian life. The person who lives a good Christian life, but is not heroic, will certainly get to heaven, but he is not canonization material. Canonization material means that the person never suffered Purgatory, because he atoned for his or her sins while in life.
The rest, miracles, etc. are extras that are not required by faith, only by law. The pope makes the law; therefore, he can bypass it too. Pope Gregory IX canonized Francis of Assisi in 18 months without a study, without a beatification. His position was that he knew Francis to be in heaven, because Francis had been his friend and his superior. He knew of his heroic life first hand. He did the same for Anthony of Padua. Anthony’s is the fasted canonization in history, only 11 months. The pope waited for the weather to improve in order to travel to Padua to canonize him.
I would argue that your average, run of the mill father and husband who works an average, boring job, pays the bills, spends time with his wife and kids, instills in his children moral values and a love for God, takes them to church on Sundays, maybe struggles with money from time to time but always is kind to his family, struggles with sin but always fights it and strives to do the right thing, and constantly does whatever he can to serve his family no matter the sacrifice from him it may require is just as holy and just as much of a saint as the great saints he may have named his children after and taught to admire.
Such a person can certainly be a saint. As to the term “as great” there is a hierarchy among the saints. They are not equal. The Church teaches this. They are different because of their individual personalities. They are also different in degrees of holiness. For example, the only saint whom the Church recognizes as the perfect Christian, the Mirror of Perfection and the Seraphic Father is St. Francis of Assisi. He was given the title Seraphic because his love of God is like that of a seraph. It burned like a blinding fire.
The good thing is that the saints don’t mind this hierarchy. It’s sinners who are bothered by it. That’s probably why they are saints and we’re not. Saints admit that their degree of holiness is what it is. It is not more or less than what God has made possible for them.
As to why God makes more grace available to certain saints than to others, I believe it has to do with the needs of the Church at the time. In Francis’ case, the Church needed to be saved from collapse. He did just that. Catholics needed to become Christians. Francis converted Catholics back to Christianity. Clergy and hierarchy needed to learn collegiality. Francis introduced the practice of collegiality by founding an order that operates on collegiality, where the layman, the non-ordained brother, the ordained brother, the sister, and the nuns are all part of one body and where the head sees himself not above that body, but as part of that body, guiding it to holiness. There was a need for obedience to the bishops and the popes without second-guessing them, even if they asked the faithful to do what is foolish. As long as it is not contrary to the Commandments, then obedience is the order of the day. Francis re-introduces a concept that Benedict had defined and introduced when he led the Benedictines, but which had gotten lost over the centuries. These were the needs of the Church at that time.
Each period in history is gifted with saints who respond to the needs of their time and place. This does not mean that other people are not in heaven. That’s a whole other sector of the population. We venerate them and honor them on the Feast of All Saints, because they are the unknown saints, like the father and husband whom you described.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
