Suppressed Cultus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Not_Sure_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Not_Sure_1

Guest
What is meant by suppressed cultus? Does this mean that honoring that saint is a mortal sin?
 
From what I understand when there is a “cultus suppressed” it means they were removed from the calendar because there was little or no evidence historically of authenticity.

I don’t think it is a mortal sin to ask for their intercession, we can ask for the intercession of our relatives and friends who may be in purgatory.
 
A suppressed cultus really is kind of a misleading name.

All it means is that the public-cult of the Saint is no longer officially supported
(such as with a liturgical feast day, a memorial mass, etc., etc.)
The Saint may still be honored privately with no problem whatsoever.

Saint Philomena’s public cultus was suppressed, sort of, in 1961, to make
way for Saints with more historically-verifiable biographies (such as Clare, Lawrence, etc), yet her main shrine was never dismantled (nor was it EVER intended to be, either), her devotion has enjoyed a huge resurgence since 1986, thanks to Patti Melvin of The Living Rosary Association and thanks to the good efforts of Father Giovanni Braschi of the Mugnano, Italy, shrine. More than 11 million people now belong to the Universal Living Rosary Association, and millions support the Shrine in Mugnano, and many, many, many people belong to the ArchConfraternity of St. Philomena, too, and
with FULL Church approval.
Not bad for a Saint who cultus was “suppressed.”
 
Jaypeeto4 said:
A suppressed cultus really is kind of a misleading name.

All it means is that the public-cult of the Saint is no longer officially supported
(such as with a liturgical feast day, a memorial mass, etc., etc.)
The Saint may still be honored privately with no problem whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t Saint Valentine’s feast day suppressed due to a lack of evidence?
 
an example would be Simon of Trent, I heard his cult was forbidden, which is a pretty harsh statement. Does that come to the point of anathema sit, or are the words stronger than what they mean?
 
In 1965, following the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church began to reinvestigate the story of “little Simon” and opened the trial records anew. Finally declaring the episode a fraud, the cult of Simon was suppressed by Pope Paul VI and the shrine erected to Simon was dismantled. His feast day was removed from the calendar, and his future veneration was officially forbidden, Catholics who oppose the Vatican II reforms continue to venerate Simon and celebrate his feast day, March 24.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between a saint who may not have actually existed and a fraud intended to justify persecution.
 
Not_Sure said:
an example would be Simon of Trent, I heard his cult was forbidden, which is a pretty harsh statement. Does that come to the point of anathema sit, or are the words stronger than what they mean?
Click to expand...
I am not yet convinced that his cult was “forbidden”. In a quick search, some sources that have a distinct anti-VII bias use that word, while I have not been able to find the actual decree of 1965.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top