Saint Olivia -- Fictional?

[ConHusker]

I read in today’s The Catholic Company Morning Offering that the saint of the day was Saint Olivia of Palermo. Apparently she was believed to be real, but was in fact a fictional character. She received a large following due to the story.

So my question / confusion is that the church can name fictional characters, saints? I mean, yes I am sure the church can definitively name anyone a saint, but I guess I am surprised that a fictional character would be bestowed with the honor. Because clearly, the saintly designation would not confer a heavenly designation as she wasn’t real. But does it or should it diminish the honor of being a saint since Saint Olivia didn’t actually live.

Can someone just help me try to wrap my mind around this?? Or am I way of my rocker with this one??

Cheers!

ConHusker
A.M.D.G.

 

[marylauravicuna]

I read in today’s The Catholic Company Morning Offering that the saint of the day was Saint Olivia of Palermo. Apparently she was believed to be real, but was in fact a fictional character. She received a large following due to the story.

So my question / confusion is that the church can name fictional characters, saints? I mean, yes I am sure the church can definitively name anyone a saint, but I guess I am surprised that a fictional character would be bestowed with the honor. Because clearly, the saintly designation would not confer a heavenly designation as she wasn’t real. But does it or should it diminish the honor of being a saint since Saint Olivia didn’t actually live.

Can someone just help me try to wrap my mind around this?? Or am I way of my rocker with this one??

Cheers!

ConHusker
A.M.D.G.

There’s a difference between a “canonized” saint determined by the Magisterium (generally after producing scientifically verified miracles but not always), and others - some of whom, as you noted here, have never existed. Yes, there is no honor to being a saint when you’ve never actually lived.

 

[Verka]

Saints are a messy business at the best of times. I understand at one point the Buddha was considered a saint in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barlaam_and_Josaphat

Then you get the ones who’s legends have been blown out of all proportion like Saint George; I understand he might have killed a King or Tribe Leader called the Dragon, but to suggest he slew an actual scaly fire breathing monster during the dark ages sounds silly.

 

[marylauravicuna]

Saints are a messy business at the best of times. I understand at one point the Buddha was considered a saint in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barlaam_and_Josaphat

Then you get the ones who’s legends have been blown out of all proportion like Saint George; I understand he might have killed a King or Tribe Leader called the Dragon, but to suggest he slew an actual scaly fire breathing monster during the dark ages sounds silly.

Although Barlaam and Josaphat were never formally canonized, they were included in earlier editions of the Roman Martyrology (feast day 27 November)[50] — though not in the Roman Missal — and in the Eastern Orthodox Church liturgical calendar (26 August in Greek tradition etc.[40] / 19 November in Russian tradition).[41][42]

I’ve never heard of a formally canonized saint that was later found to be not worthy of veneration. Has anyone else?

 

[Verka]

Simon of Trent springs to mind

stsimonoftrent.com/ He was acknowledged as a saint by Pope Sixtus V and his cult remained popular right up until it was condemned and forbidden in 1965.

The wikipedia article says he was never formally canonized, but other website seem to go against that, I mean why would a Pope acknowledge a non-saint as a saint so…Its hard to say