I don’t know that I agree with this. Vatican II has been used to justify countless abuses (that are not consistent with VII) but some of this stuff coming out predates Vatican II and many of the priests involved were pre Vatican II priests. The “cover-up” issues seem unrelated to Vatican II and may be more tradition related. Also, the Legionaries definitely have a transitional bent, and they were still stung quite hard by scandals.
I’m sorry I must be missing something - how does praying with other religions equate to all religions being equal? When did any Pope say all religions are equal? I’ve heard of JPII honoring the truths contained in other religions but not equating them to the Church. Judging by the Anglicans wholesale entering the fold, I would say constructive communication is working better then looking down ones nose at them.
He also damaged the faith in his actions toward other faiths which may have seemed beneficial and respectful, but which actually caused damage to the faith.
I agree that the Catholic Church would certainly be different.
An opinion not shared by all, including the present pontiff.
St. Pius X was something else. He was truly a great pope. I won’t try to compare the two, as they were so vastly different, but I also consider Ven. John Paul II a great man. Besides, such a comparative judgement belongs to God alone. Our opinions are just that, opinions.
Which opinion? The damage to the faith or the dispelling of bad Catholic stereotypes, of which I am still waiting for clarification on?
i asked out of ignorance, not just automaticly assuming that JPII was a great pope
I do not know why you feel that way. It seems clear from the context that he was referring to the opinion that John Paul II was damaging to the faith.But I somehow feel that I will probably will be waiting for a while on that one.
This is new to me since, according to Vatican I, infallibility only applies to issues of faith and morals. Please provide some reference to prove that all canonizations are infallible.
Wow! Again, please show us what binds us so.
If John Paul II had actually done damage to the faith the Sacred Congregation for the Causes of Saints would not have declared that they found no possible reason to object to his canonization. They also stated, under oath that they found his lie to be exemplary (fitting of being emulated), filled with heroic virtue, and fidelity to the faith.
After they finished their study, it went on to a committee of Cardinal Theologians who are experts on such matters. The voted unanimously that the man live a heroic Christian life of virtue, had always been faithful to the Church and had performed his duties with fidelity. They swore to this.
Then it went to the pope who ruled that the conclusions of the two committees were correct and who ruled that the study and dissection of the life of John Paul II be brought to a close and that it should never be open again, but that the committee now move to proving that the alleged miracles occurred through the intercession of John Paul II and they were ordered to speed it up, because Benedict XVI believes that John Paul is in heaven. Thus he declared him Venerable, which cannot be taken back once it’s declared, signed and sealed with the sign of Peter.
I’m not sure why this conversation is even taking place, when the Church has already ruled on his sanctity and what we’re waiting for is decree of beatification, not a decree of holiness. That decree has already been made and it’s not going to change. It’s either accepted by the faithful or not. But the Church accepts it and that’s all that matters.
We have to learn to think in ecclesial terms. Once a pope accepts something as big as the holiness of an individual, anything we say does not make that person less holy or less deserving of our veneration, which is the status of John Paul today. He is being held up for veneration, hence Venerable John Paul the Great. That title was given to him by Pope Benedict XVI. He called him The Great long before this. He is so convinced of this that he waived all of the waiting requirements to begin the process toward canonization.
He can also wave the miracles and wave the beatification, if he so wishes and declare him a saint Ex Cathedra. It has been done three times: St. Francis of Assisi, St. Clare of Assisi, St. Anthony of Padua. Two of the popes involved were Franciscans and the third was the hard been the Cardinal Protector of the Franciscans. These popes knew these people personally. They canonized them, against every vote by the Cardinals. They did so Ex-Cathedra. Of course, all canonizations are infallible decrees. But not all are Ex-Cathedra. Most are investigated prior to the canonization.
If Pope Benedict feels strongly enough about this and wants to do this before he dies, he can bypass the studies of the miracles and the beatification. Then we would all be bound to believe that John Paul II is a saint and a man to be venerated and imitated. That’s why the Church holds up the saints, for veneration and imitation. The saints get nothing out of a canonization. With or without it, they’re in heaven.
All the nonsense about him praying with people of other faiths is just that, nonsense. This has never been held against any saint. There are many saints who have done this. The fact that one prays alongside a person of another faith, does not mean that one is praying like that person. On that list would be:
St. Francis of Assisi who prayed with the Muslims and who introduced Muslim customs into his order
St. Francis Xavier who prayed with Buddhists and wore had an orange cassock made for him to blend in with the Buddhists
St. Maximilian Kolbe who also prayed with Buddhists and who told our brothers going to Japan not to wear their Franciscan habit, but to procure the clothing of the Japanese coolie, because it was more culturally appropriate
Bl. John XXIII who led Sabbath services every Saturday for Jewish Children during WW II while they were displaced in Greece and under his care
Bl. Mother Teresa who prayed with Muslims, Hindus and Protestants and who named all of her houses not with names of saints, but with Hindu names of virtues and truths that are common to Hindus and Christians, such as House of Peace
All of these people predate Vatican II. They are all considered among the great saints and missionaries of the Catholic Church. There is no precedent to say that John Paul II did any harm to the Church. He may not have been the best administrator. But that’s not a requirement for canonization. If that were the case, we’d have to clean out our liturgical calendar. Was Jesus a great administrator? Did he leave the Church in the hands of great administrators? Maybe the election of Peter was part of his message to us that the Church is very human, not only divine. Maybe Jesus did not want us to forget that and that the papacy is very human.
Had Peter stayed on top of things, we would not have 22 Catholic Churches that make up one holy catholic church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Canonization is generally held to be infallible (see here, here, inter alia, and here for what strikes me as a pretty good explanation). However, the same sources indicated that beatification or a declaration of heroic virtue are not generally held to be infallible.
JPII was not asleep at the wheel - although I agree that there have probably been better. Overall he was a very Holy Man. That said - that ecumenical prayer event in Assisi in the eighties was a big mistake…although that was maybe his advisors
Were any of these mentioned above during the activities mentioned acting as the head of the Catholic Church?If John Paul II had actually done damage to the faith the Sacred Congregation for the Causes of Saints would not have declared that they found no possible reason to object to his canonization. They also stated, under oath that they found his lie to be exemplary (fitting of being emulated), filled with heroic virtue, and fidelity to the faith.
After they finished their study, it went on to a committee of Cardinal Theologians who are experts on such matters. The voted unanimously that the man live a heroic Christian life of virtue, had always been faithful to the Church and had performed his duties with fidelity. They swore to this.
Then it went to the pope who ruled that the conclusions of the two committees were correct and who ruled that the study and dissection of the life of John Paul II be brought to a close and that it should never be open again, but that the committee now move to proving that the alleged miracles occurred through the intercession of John Paul II and they were ordered to speed it up, because Benedict XVI believes that John Paul is in heaven. Thus he declared him Venerable, which cannot be taken back once it’s declared, signed and sealed with the sign of Peter.
I’m not sure why this conversation is even taking place, when the Church has already ruled on his sanctity and what we’re waiting for is decree of beatification, not a decree of holiness. That decree has already been made and it’s not going to change. It’s either accepted by the faithful or not. But the Church accepts it and that’s all that matters.
We have to learn to think in ecclesial terms. Once a pope accepts something as big as the holiness of an individual, anything we say does not make that person less holy or less deserving of our veneration, which is the status of John Paul today. He is being held up for veneration, hence Venerable John Paul the Great. That title was given to him by Pope Benedict XVI. He called him The Great long before this. He is so convinced of this that he waived all of the waiting requirements to begin the process toward canonization.
He can also wave the miracles and wave the beatification, if he so wishes and declare him a saint Ex Cathedra. It has been done three times: St. Francis of Assisi, St. Clare of Assisi, St. Anthony of Padua. Two of the popes involved were Franciscans and the third was the hard been the Cardinal Protector of the Franciscans. These popes knew these people personally. They canonized them, against every vote by the Cardinals. They did so Ex-Cathedra. Of course, all canonizations are infallible decrees. But not all are Ex-Cathedra. Most are investigated prior to the canonization.
If Pope Benedict feels strongly enough about this and wants to do this before he dies, he can bypass the studies of the miracles and the beatification. Then we would all be bound to believe that John Paul II is a saint and a man to be venerated and imitated. That’s why the Church holds up the saints, for veneration and imitation. The saints get nothing out of a canonization. With or without it, they’re in heaven.
All the nonsense about him praying with people of other faiths is just that, nonsense. This has never been held against any saint. There are many saints who have done this. The fact that one prays alongside a person of another faith, does not mean that one is praying like that person. On that list would be:
St. Francis of Assisi who prayed with the Muslims and who introduced Muslim customs into his order
St. Francis Xavier who prayed with Buddhists and wore had an orange cassock made for him to blend in with the Buddhists
St. Maximilian Kolbe who also prayed with Buddhists and who told our brothers going to Japan not to wear their Franciscan habit, but to procure the clothing of the Japanese coolie, because it was more culturally appropriate
Bl. John XXIII who led Sabbath services every Saturday for Jewish Children during WW II while they were displaced in Greece and under his care
Bl. Mother Teresa who prayed with Muslims, Hindus and Protestants and who named all of her houses not with names of saints, but with Hindu names of virtues and truths that are common to Hindus and Christians, such as House of Peace
All of these people predate Vatican II. They are all considered among the great saints and missionaries of the Catholic Church. There is no precedent to say that John Paul II did any harm to the Church. He may not have been the best administrator. But that’s not a requirement for canonization. If that were the case, we’d have to clean out our liturgical calendar. Was Jesus a great administrator? Did he leave the Church in the hands of great administrators? Maybe the election of Peter was part of his message to us that the Church is very human, not only divine. Maybe Jesus did not want us to forget that and that the papacy is very human.
Had Peter stayed on top of things, we would not have 22 Catholic Churches that make up one holy catholic church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
All of your references point to the opinions of theologians (weighty ones, I’ll admit, including the angelic doctor) but no dogmatic pronouncements that specifically deal with the infallibility of canonizations. Even St. Thomas stopped short of canonizations being a moral certitude and required of us to be called Catholic. My comments to the kind Brother stemmed from his remarks that we MUST believe a particular saint is a saint. That is not the case.