On what basis was St Joan of Arc canonized?

[Polaris]

I think it was only about 30 years or so later that she was recognized as a saint. She was killed because she supposedly had a vision and they thought she was a witch due to it. Later authorities reversed the rulings. I don’t know whether she would technically be a martyr. I think a martyr is someone who is killed because of their faith. With her it was kind of true because she supposedly saw visions and she refused to recant. Consequently they tried her as a witch.

No her name was only cleared thirty years later, by the Inquisitar general of France who blamed the englishman, with permission of the pope (no politics their either hehehe ) I have to admit this is not a shinig example of Cathlics in history. She was cannonized in 1920.

 

[childofmary1143]

I use a traditionalist Catholic curriculum for homeschooling my girls (LONG story; there aren’t any Jewish curriculums, and so I just remove any religious content from the one I am using).

Anyway, in the 4th grade curriculum today, there was a sentence that read: “Saint Joan of Arc was a martyr for the Catholic Faith in the 15th _______” (century is the word to be filled in).

Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but as a lifetime Joan of Arc fan, I know she did not die as a martyr, technically.

The church excommunciated her for heresy, burned her at the stake, and then, centuries later (1920, under Pope Benedict XV), she was canonized, but NOT as a martyr, but as a VIRGIN.

Isn’t this right?

I’m almost embarrassed to say that I didn’t know she wasn’t canonized as a martyr.

Wow this is big as from watching the movie (Ingrid Bergman), how can you NOT say she was a martyr? She DIED for upholding the truth. Boy I sure would like some explanation as to why she can’t be a Martyr from the Hierarchy.

 

[Lapell]

I don’t think one can be canonized as a martyr on the sole ground of private revelations or private visions.
Ste Therese of Avila did have her share of visions and private revelations, for instance, but it’s not on them that the Church canonized her and then called her a doctor of the Church! No! Whenever she wrote a manuscript book it was because she was asked to, it was not on her own! And she always submitted to the authority of the Catholic Church.
Once somebody in high position in the Church ( a bishop, I think) told her to burn her manuscript which she showed him for him to examine, and immediately, without hesitation, she threw the manuscript right into the fireplace. She was known as a holy woman, and her soul was in fire, so to speak, for the sake of her Lord and her God.
Visions and locutions may help, but because of our finite senses, we may be led to illusions were we to trust only in them. For this reason, none of the saints can be canonized solely because of private revelations. I think this may explain Saint Joan of Arc’s case to some extent…

 

[Lapell]

Like as to what the visions had told her, nobody other than she could say what they said, they could have been illusions… Given that things happened as she was told, they might have been authentic, but it’s not enough to determine that somebody is or isn’t a saint. And like Fr Benedict Groeschel pointed out in his book A Still Small Voice, one may have had visions or locutions that proved not to be authentic messages from heaven and yet would still be recognized a saint by the Church. It has happened and can happen again. (Of course they would not then be recognized as saints because of the false messages, it’s quite obvious! It’s how they lived their lives in accordance with God’s Commandments and the Gospel as the Apostles transmitted it to the whole Church…

 

[Irish_Saints]

On what basis was St Joan of Arc canonized?

Oh, that’s simple! Every kid remembers from Sunday School that St. Joan of Arc was married to Noah!

 

[Lapell]

Oh, that’s simple! Every kid remembers from Sunday School that St. Joan of Arc was married to Noah!

Ha! Ha! Ha! A marriage that bridged the gap of different eras, indeed! I hadn’t heard that joke before…

 

[antimon]

I’m almost embarrassed to say that I didn’t know she wasn’t canonized as a martyr.

Wow this is big as from watching the movie (Ingrid Bergman), how can you NOT say she was a martyr? She DIED for upholding the truth. Boy I sure would like some explanation as to why she can’t be a Martyr from the Hierarchy.

please read earlier posts, it’s explained quite clearly. Being Christian was not the cause of her trial and death, nor some visions etc… She died because she made English very upset by defeating them.

 

[childofmary1143]

please read earlier posts, it’s explained quite clearly. Being Christian was not the cause of her trial and death, nor some visions etc… She died because she made English very upset by defeating them.

Being Christian is about the Truth and because she spoke the Truth she was martyred by those English. It hasn’t been explained authentically at all in light of Catholic teaching.

 

[antimon]

Being Christian is about the Truth and because she spoke the Truth she was martyred by those English. It hasn’t been explained authentically at all in light of Catholic teaching.

Please, read some of her biographies:
newadvent.org/cathen/08409c.htm
joanofarc.info/

Her visions and “heresies” were only an convenient excuse for executing her. The real reason was that the Englishmen feared her, because she defeated them in important battles.

You know, not every Christian that is murdered is murdered for their faith.

 

[childofmary1143]

Please, read some of her biographies:
newadvent.org/cathen/08409c.htm
joanofarc.info/

Her visions and “heresies” were only an convenient excuse for executing her. The real reason was that the Englishmen feared her, because she defeated them in important battles.

You know, not every Christian that is murdered is murdered for their faith.

I realize that not ever Christian that is murdered is done for their faith but St. Joan of Arc was martyred for her faith.

You said that the reason why the English Bishops (they were Bishops) wanted her dead was because she defeated England in battles. Well St. Joan of Arc was ordered by God (via St. Michael and others who communicated to her) to help the French FIGHT the English. If God asks you to do something, you do it. That is part of our faith. By being obedient to the faith, she was murdered.

 

[SFH]

I use a traditionalist Catholic curriculum for homeschooling my girls (LONG story; there aren’t any Jewish curriculums, and so I just remove any religious content from the one I am using).

Anyway, in the 4th grade curriculum today, there was a sentence that read: “Saint Joan of Arc was a martyr for the Catholic Faith in the 15th _______” (century is the word to be filled in).

Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but as a lifetime Joan of Arc fan, I know she did not die as a martyr, technically.

The church excommunciated her for heresy, burned her at the stake, and then, centuries later (1920, under Pope Benedict XV), she was canonized, but NOT as a martyr, but as a VIRGIN.

Isn’t this right?

A person isn’t canonized because they were a virgin, martyr, etc. They are canonized because they lived a life of emminent sanctity. The Catholic Church provides certain descriptives to certain saints that designate their liturgical cult. Thus, a saint could be:

Apostle
Martyr
Confessor
Doctor
Bishop
Virgin

Well, you get the picture. A martyr is a saint who shed his blood in witness to his faith. Since St. Joan of Arc was burned at the stake, in part, because she retracted her earlier statements (made under duress), she is properly classified as both a Virgin and Martyr. However, I believe the Catholic Church has limited the designation to just Virgin in her case.

 

[adrift]

EWTN

Had a question recently

St. Joan of Arc
Question from Annonymous on 4/23/2008:

Mr. Bunson,

I read that Joan of Arc was turned over to the British by a French bishop so as to further his own agenda. I’d like to know if the Church ever took disciplinary action against that bishop.

Thanks,

Annonymous
Answer by Matthew Bunson on 4/26/2008:

The bishop in question was Pierre Cauchon, (1371-1442), the ardently pro-English bishop of Beauvais. It was he who spearheaded her trial under the prompting of the English. As the sway of the English protected him, Cauchon did not face punishment for his involvement in the trial. However, as Beauvais fell to the French, he could not return to that city. Instead, he remained with the English and subsequently took part in the coronation of King Henry VI in Paris. Ever after an agent of the English cause in France, he died at Rouen.

Pope Callistus III famously opened an investigation into the trial of Joan of Arc starting in 1452. In 1456, the Holy See confirmed that the trial of Joan was an untter miscarriage of justice, declared Joan a martyr, and condemned Cauchon for having allowed his office to be used for political ends. Joan was declared officially innocent of all charges in July 1456.

COPYRIGHT 2008

 

[childofmary1143]

EWTN

Had a question recently

So does this mean the Church rightfully declares her to be a Martyr?

 

[Lapell]

So does this mean the Church rightfully declares her to be a Martyr?

What it means is that the Church declared her innocent of the charges put against her. And Joan of Arc was declared a saint.
I already posted some reasons as to why it would be difficult for the Church to declare her a martyr. But she was declared a saint nevertheless. And to the French people and everybody who admire her, she certainly is a great heroin dear to our hearts! Isn’t that what counts most?
I hope this thread wasn’t started in order to bring us to have doubt about the decisions of the Magisterium of the Church, that would not be a good thing to do!

 

[HashemEchad]

What it means is that the Church declared her innocent of the charges put against her. And Joan of Arc was declared a saint.
I already posted some reasons as to why it would be difficult for the Church to declare her a martyr. But she was declared a saint nevertheless. And to the French people and everybody who admire her, she certainly is a great heroin dear to our hearts! Isn’t that what counts most?
I hope this thread wasn’t started in order to bring us to have doubt about the decisions of the Magisterium of the Church, that would not be a good thing to do!

I just think Joan of Arc totally rocks! When I was a kid, me and a bunch of other girls in the neighborhood (most of whom were NOT Catholic) used to really adore her. The boys would say nasty things about her, just to annoy us, and we’d threaten to beat them all up (we were tomboys!)

 

[peary]

I use a traditionalist Catholic curriculum for homeschooling my girls (LONG story; there aren’t any Jewish curriculums, and so I just remove any religious content from the one I am using).

Anyway, in the 4th grade curriculum today, there was a sentence that read: “Saint Joan of Arc was a martyr for the Catholic Faith in the 15th _______” (century is the word to be filled in).

Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but as a lifetime Joan of Arc fan, I know she did not die as a martyr, technically.

The church excommunciated her for heresy, burned her at the stake, and then, centuries later (1920, under Pope Benedict XV), she was canonized, but NOT as a martyr, but as a VIRGIN.

Isn’t this right?

Only the diocese of which she was a part excommunicated her for heresy; the entire Church did not condemn her. It is the same with other saints - they might be despised by their priests and bishops in their lifetimes but years later are found worthy of canonization. Or the same with Marian apparitions - they may be condemned or looked negatively upon by the bishop and diocese in where they occur, but sometimes years later (sometimes centuries, such as recently with regard to Our Lady of Laus in France) they are recognized as worthy of belief.

 

[Lapell]

I just think Joan of Arc totally rocks! When I was a kid, me and a bunch of other girls in the neighborhood (most of whom were NOT Catholic) used to really adore her. The boys would say nasty things about her, just to annoy us, and we’d threaten to beat them all up (we were tomboys!)

And when did you first hear of Joan of Arc? Was it from a movie? Or maybe otherwise?

 

[holdencaulfield]

And when did you first hear of Joan of Arc? Was it from a movie? Or maybe otherwise?

St. Joan of Arc was not a martyr however. She was canonized for holding strong to her faith, and for preforming miracles.

 

[HashemEchad]

And when did you first hear of Joan of Arc? Was it from a movie? Or maybe otherwise?

I forget the FIRST time, but I think it was that movie with Ingrid Bergman. All the little girls idolized her when I was a kid, and they didn’t have to be Catholic either!

Just something about a girl not much older than us who led an army and won battles…seemed pretty cool!

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

And actually she was arrested not because of particular suspicious teachings but because her presence had helped the Frenchmen to finally react and fight the Englishmen. The Englishmen thought that by having her convicted of heresy and sorcery (witchcraft?) the Frenchmen would not have as many chances of winning against them. And that bishop, I think his last name was Cauchon, I think he himself had some ambitions, and maybe a leaning toward Jansenism which is condemned by the Vatican…

**Jansenism was not an issue until 200 years later. FWIW. **​

**The list of charges against her was very long, which does not suggest lack of zeal to destroy her. The problem is that heresy is what the Church calls heresy - so it can always be interpreted so as to allow a court to execute on charges which might otherwise seem to have a very remote connection, if any, with heresy. It would not require much ingenuity for a skilled lawyer (or bevy of them) to make a “political” position taken by the accused into a sin against the Faith. The notion of heresy is a half-empty set, into which anything & everything can be decanted, as may be required. This is very problematic **

Besides, attempts to “whitewash” the Church, though intelligible to us, might in fact have the effect of denying to the Church of the past the credit for destroying all sorts of people whom the Church then regarded as reprehensible, but whom we, being moderns, do not. For instance: massacring Albigensians might seem a wholly praiseworthy activity 800 years ago, even if we might see things otherwise now.

**So it’s entirely possible that attempts today, to insulate the Church from the responsibility for some of its more repellent activities in the past, are unnecessary because in the past some at least of those activities would have been regarded as good. **

so he had some bias, unfortunately. Ultimately, she was executed because of her patriotism and because she already was considered an inspiring symbol in the eyes of the French people. Are these enough grounds for her to be considered a martyr? To me, it’s hard to say.