Totally Out of the Loop: What's the Problem with Pope Paul VI?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CaptainPrudeman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Which, apparently, the Church has said Paul VI did. It is not up to any of us to say she is wrong.
 
semper_catholicus said:
The reason we canonize people is not SOLEY to recognize that they’re in heaven, but becuase they demonstrated REMARKABLE and HEROIC virtue and holiness.
Click to expand...
any Pope who could author Humanae Vitae is both remarkable and heroic. How well you run an organization isn’t that remarkable or heroic. If it was there would be a lot of CEOs in heaven.
 
Humanae vitae was pretty good. It had some problems, but that’s beside the point.

There is a difference between doing one heroic thing and possessing heroic virtue.
 
Let’s ask all of our heroes “That was good, but what have you done lately?”
 
Last edited:
Right, here is a definition of heroic virtue from the old CE:
Benedict XIV, whose chapters on heroic virtue are classical, thus describes heroicity: “In order to be heroic a Christian virtue must enable its owner to perform virtuous actions with uncommon promptitude, ease, and pleasure, from supernatural motives and without human reasoning, with self-abnegation and full control over his natural inclinations.” An heroic virtue, then, is a habit of good conduct that has become a second nature, a new motive power stronger than all corresponding inborn inclinations, capable of rendering easy a series of acts each of which, for the ordinary man, would be beset with very great, if not insurmountable, difficulties.
Click to expand...
I don’t know if that can even be said to describe how Pope Paul made his decision with regard to Humanae Vitae.
 
From EWTN
The exercise of infallibility comes only when the pope himself proclaims a person a saint,
Click to expand...
http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur373.htm

Canonization is considered an exercise of infallibility (though not everyone accepts this, like the SSPX). I think the extent to which this is dismissed is proportional to one’s opinion of the later canonizations.

Which brings us to Pope Paul VI. Of course there will be those that hold the minority view that canonizations are not infallible. It is not a heretical view, as this is not a matter of dogma. Theologians do not always agree on such things. So when someone like St. Paul VI is canonized, it allows an opening for those who do not like his papacy to reject the canonization.
 
Last edited:
Man if Pope Paul VI can’t be a saint then there’s no chance for me to get to heaven

Bokbok
 
Off-topic but just curious about the following message which appears at the end of the thread:

This topic will automatically close in 7 hours.​

Why 7 hours?

But I say the sooner the better.

:coffee: 😠🚬
 
Last edited:
The problem is that many who start down that path (not pointing fingers at anyone on this thread in particular) also struggle under the burden of hubris and truly believe that they, and a very tiny group of elite faithful and priests, alone truly understand the faith while the vast majority of bishops, priests, and faithful are out to lunch. Deprogramming that is a challenge.
They are fed by a very tiny group of very vocal priests who constantly proclaim a sensational “the hierarchy is all infected by the devil!” message…
 
Last edited:
gracepoole said:
So…no one thinks this is odd?
Click to expand...
I would say it is downright rebellious, inappropriate, and childish. I put it right up there that refuse to call President Trump, President Trump. The Church has spoken. Even if one does not agree, or believe canonizations fallible, it is not appropriate to reject the title given by the Church.
 
yankeesouth said:
The big picture is that 50 years after Vatican ll and the Church is not in very good shape.
Click to expand...
Correlation does not equal causation. The world has changed a huge amount since the V2 council convened. Blaming English language masses for any decline in Catholic adherence and piety seems to be a stretch.
 
phil19034 said:
I agree with you in regards to objecting to call the man Saint.
Click to expand...
I can understand people resisting the cost. Near my location here in Pittsburgh, there is a senior citizens’ apartment building called “John Paul Plaza”, named after the Pope. To go through the expense of changing the name because John Paul subsequently died and was canonized as a saint is a burden.
 
phil19034 said:
.However, I would agree that people are within their rights to question the modern process being used.

I also question the wisdom of a Saint being beatified and canonized by the same Pope. We don’t want the canonization process to become a popularity contest.

NOTE: this is NOT a comment against Popes Paul & Francis. It’s just a simple observation.
Click to expand...
This is a comment on Popes John Paul II and Benedict more than Paul and Francis.

The modern canonization process does not have a consistent pause, so it gets caught up in hurried deliberations. The standard, not always adhered to, was 50 years before starting the process.

At least it took 40 years for St Paul VI to be canonized, about the same as Pius X, who was also beatified and canonized by the same pope.
 
I think the article makes an interesting point that historically, the person has to have a cult following BEFORE being beatified & declared a Saint, not develop (or attempt) to develop a cult following afterwards.

For example: Fulton Sheen surely has a cult following etc His process is stalled because two diocese are suing one another in civil court over his body.

They should be appealing to the Vatican only, not the the civil courts.

What a disgrace that whole thing is.
 
Dovekin said:
40.png
phil19034:
.However, I would agree that people are within their rights to question the modern process being used.

I also question the wisdom of a Saint being beatified and canonized by the same Pope. We don’t want the canonization process to become a popularity contest.

NOTE: this is NOT a comment against Popes Paul & Francis. It’s just a simple observation.
Click to expand...
This is a comment on Popes John Paul II and Benedict more than Paul and Francis.

The modern canonization process does not have a consistent pause, so it gets caught up in hurried deliberations. The standard, not always adhered to, was 50 years before starting the process.

At least it took 40 years for St Paul VI to be canonized, about the same as Pius X, who was also beatified and canonized by the same pope.
Click to expand...
I agree.

I said it wasn’t a mark against Pope Paul or Francis.

I simply feel that it would be more prudent for pope’s not to canonize people they beatified.
 
Last edited:
I find Sheen’s case so sad. He was once a bishop in my diocese and my pastor was ordained by him. He had a HUGE impact on my pastor and therefore on my parish. (Note that my diocese is not one of the two disputing control over his body.) 😧
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top