I realize that I’m arriving late in this gathering. But what Cardinal Newman is writing about and what Pope Pius X was saying were not the same thing.
Pope Pius X and other popes and councils have made it clear that there was not new revelation after the death of the last apostle. What Cardinal Newman is speaking about is the definition of dogmas. Many dogmas were defined after the deaths of the last apostle. But they existed in seminal form in the Church prior to their definition. A good example that Cardinal Newman gives is the teaching on the episcopacy. Like this there was the Immaculate Concpetion and the Assumption of Mary or the hypostatic union. These dogmas were defined long after the death of the apostles.
Cardinal Newman’s language is not one that we are accustomed to using today and it becomes confusing to us in the 21st century. But it was not confusing to the popes.
In addition, the cause for the beatification and canonization of a man or woman is based on their heoric life of faith, not on their writings. Their writings are examined to make sure that the person was not a heretic. Even a person who makes mistakes in his theology, can be a saint. Saints Bonaventure and Thomas Aquinas both made mistakes in their theology. Not everything that they wrote became part of the teaching of the Church. But there writings revealed in intense life of prayer, faith and sacrifice.
When you look at a person’s writings, you’re looking for something about the person and his faith. Even when the person’s writings contain errors, those errors are not always indicative of a lack of faith. They can be indicative of a misunderstanding on the part of the writer. Therefore, they cannot be deemed heresy, because there is no deliberate attempt to mislead.
This happened with our own St. Maximilian Kolbe. There were two big issues in his case.
- His devotion to the Blessed Mother. While the postulator for the cause proposed this as a sign of great faith, the devil’s advocate rejected it on the grounds that it bordered on pietism and idolatry. St. Max took quite a beating fromt he devil’s advocate on this one.
- The question was raised by the devil’s advocate that St. Max had not died for the faith and could not be inscribed into the book of martyrs, but should be inscirbed into the list of holy men, because he was a friar or into the list of confessors because he was a priest. In the end the commission agreed to inscribe him into the list of holy men, at the request of the Franciscans, because they wanted to stress his vocation to the religious life.
On the morning of his canonization everyone arriving for the mass was shocked to find red vestments in the sacristy of St. Peter’s. Red is only used for the Holy Spirit and for martyrs. Upon asking questions, the Cardinals, bishops and religious superiors of the Franciscans were told that the night before, John Paul II had thrown out the entire study by the commission, because he had decided to canonize Maximilian Kolbe as a martyr, long before the commission had even finished their study. He not only let them have their day in court, so to speak, but he overruled them.
This was the third time in the history of the Franciscan family where a pope had overruled a commission. The first time was Pope Gregory IX who ordered the beginning of the process for the beatification of St. Francis of Assisi. He got angry because the process reached one year and no miracle could be produced. Pope Gregory, who as Cardinal Hugolino, had been Francis’ advisor and closest ally traveld to Assisi on July 16, 1228 and without telling anyone canonized Francis. He completely bypassed the commission, the beatification and went for the canonization.
This was later repeated for St. Clare. There were no miracles, no beatification and the commission was bypassed. She was canonized on the second anniversary of her death.
Some may argue that the process, as we know it was not in place, but the fact is that it was. There are other blesseds of the same era who were beatified by Gregory IX and Alexander IV, one of those is the famous Franciscan, Bl. John Duns Scotus. Another was St. Bonaventure who died about 50 years after Francis.
The point here is that the determination for canonization is the final perrogative of the pope and the criteria is a heroic life of faith. Even the miracles can be dispensed with.
St. Elizabeth Ann Seton was canonized one miracle short. She was canonized before the rules were changed. There were only two miracles attributed to her intercession. The illusive third miracle was her faith itself, as the Holy Father said.
In the case of Cardinal Newman, whether or not he was effeminate, had a male companion, made some mistakes in the wording in his writings, case boils down to whether or not he lived a heroic Christian life. Of course, if the Holy Father wishes to wait for the two miracles needed for canonization, that is his call. He is not bound to do so. As long as there is no doubt in the pope’s mind that Cardinal Newman is a saint, he can proceed with the beatification and the canonization or skip the beatificatio completely. There is no law that binds the pope on this score.
I am wondering, if we who are sitting on the sidelines are taking too much upon ourselves. If the Cardinal is beatified, we have to accept that and a cult will be established in his diocese or even his country. If he is canonized, then we have to accept that too.
There are Catholics who have a bone to pick with Pope John XXIII, but the Holy Father has given permission for him to be venerated by the universal Church. In the USA we now have parishes named after Blessed John XXIII where his feast day is celebrated as a solemnity.
As one cardinal whom I know once said, “Someone is always going to be angry.” This is true.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
If anyone were to squirrel it away, it would be pretty damning