St.Joan of Arc Crazy?

[spruce]

Startingcatholic:

I don’t understand why people think that I think it disqualified her sainthood.

You are the only one who is questioning her sanctity by reason of insanity. I take issue with someone today making a diagnosis of someone’s mental state who lived hundreds of years ago. There is no way to verify one way or the other, and it can only serve to detract from the person - saint or not.

Startingcatholic, you are not the only one with these questions, I am sure. You may be the only one writing about them in this thread, but as I said in my last post, you may have to seek other resources to reach a point of freewill satisfaction about this topic. +

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I am not so sure. Since the Church removed the Devil’s Advocate stage of canonization, I think She is more susceptible to error with this. Either way, God guides us but He also allows us to make mistakes, even weighty matters.

I don’t question the Vatican’s decisions regarding modern saints of whom we have much documented evidence. They are the experts, they do thorough investigations. You’re free to be skeptical if you want, just like people are skeptical about all kinds of other things the Vatican does under God’s guidance.

In addition, St. Joan of Arc was canonized in 1920 and there was still a devil’s advocate. The position wasn’t reduced until 1983 under Pope JPII. So your point isn’t at all applicable to her in any event.

 

[spruce]

So your point isn’t at all applicable to her in any event.

God let’s us make mistakes. I think we agree on that. Since the canonization process is technically not infallible, with or without devil’s advocate, there could be errors. Even beyond that, Startingcatholic is encouraged to research and ask questions about it, for as long as she wants/needs.

 

[JanR]

I’m sure there were people who thought that about Jesus.

Joan is my confirmation saint – so, obviously, I believe her.

 

[JanR]

Then, if we’re going to equate visions with neurological issues, I suppose Mary’s vision of the Archangel Gabriel appearing to her was due to some neurological issues she had. Why can’t we give God credit for making these things possible and totally real?

 

[Katie777]

I never thought that. I just know she was brave.

 

[Duke12VonFalkenburg]

St. Joan was a hero and a champion of the faith. She is proof that all things are possible with God. A female peasant in a medieval age is to be at the absolute bottom of society.

This is off topic but I’d like to watch St. Joan and Joshua play a game of Chess.

 

[Dan_Defender]

If you read all the transcripts from her trials–and they are all there, word for word–she comes across as 100% sane.

Exactly. As opposed to some posters on CAF. Just by reading their posts, you know that there are underlying mental issues or scrupulosity.

 

[CTBcin]

Some “scholars” desperately want her to be crazy to make her story go away.

But here’s the thing—as a teenage girl, she led an army.
Of grown-up men.
Who were under no obligation to follow her.

Have you ever seen somebody in a true psychotic break or a flare up of schizophrenic symptoms?
Trust me. You are not going to follow them into battle.

Precisely. The accusation of “Neurological disorders” is a modern scientific way of trying to explain how she could have had visions. It totally discounts the possibility of the supernatural.

What is quite interesting is that the French king at the time highly favored her and accepted her as sane. His own father had suffered from severe neurological disorders, so I would imagine the king would have recognized if she was insane.

 

[Anesti33]

Tis_Bearself:

So your point isn’t at all applicable to her in any event.

God let’s us make mistakes. I think we agree on that. Since the canonization process is technically not infallible, with or without devil’s advocate, there could be errors. Even beyond that, Startingcatholic is encouraged to research and ask questions about it, for as long as she wants/needs.

Technically yes. A canonization proclamation is a dogmatic fact.

Canonizations and Infallibility | EWTN

 

[Dlee]

After reading Joan of Arc by Mark Twain - she was brilliant. The answers she gave in the hearings, her imprisonments, she was always several steps ahead of them.

 

[spruce]

spruce:

Tis_Bearself:

So your point isn’t at all applicable to her in any event.

God let’s us make mistakes. I think we agree on that. Since the canonization process is technically not infallible, with or without devil’s advocate, there could be errors. Even beyond that, Startingcatholic is encouraged to research and ask questions about it, for as long as she wants/needs.

Technically yes. A canonization proclamation is a dogmatic fact.

Canonizations and Infallibility | EWTN

Thank you for that information Anesti33. Let’s hope EWTN isn’t fallible in their claim.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Technically yes. A canonization proclamation is a dogmatic fact.

You are correct. But every time we have a thread on here about “I don’t like Saint X and do I have to accept that s/he’s a saint?” threads, and you try to tell the person that a canonization proclamation is regarded as infallible, people will do contortions trying to argue against that.

I have a hard time understanding why it’s so important for people to oppose a saint proclamation. In order to prove they are right, they would have to somehow show that the person in question is NOT in Heaven. This is impossible, even with lots of research, and if the saint has miracles credited to their intercession, as most do, it seems highly unlikely the saint is anywhere but Heaven.