What are the Church’s reasons for not formally canonizing Old Testament figures as Saints?

[Anesti33]

I understand about honouring of saints. Thats fine. I undertand that there was no formal process for canonization before a certain date in the church. My question is (here is another way of putting it)
Could Old Testament peoples be retroactively canonized formally by the church or is there some reason they can not.
Maybe a Canon Lawyer would know the answer to this?

It is a needless duplication of effort. It would be like baptizing someone a second time. These holy men and woman have been formally canonized by popular acclaim and veneration. It would also probably be an ecumenical insult. These saints are venerated in all of the apostolic Churches, so why should the Catholic Church claim a special hold on them? It would not be fair. Besides, the Holy See calendar is chock full of pending canonizations of newly-minted saints, why should we clog up the pipeline unnecessarily?

 

[Montrose]

I understand about honouring of saints. Thats fine. I undertand that there was no formal process for canonization before a certain date in the church. My question is (here is another way of putting it)
Could Old Testament peoples be retroactively canonized formally by the church or is there some reason they can not.
Maybe a Canon Lawyer would know the answer to this?

Your question has been answered in this thread already by several posters but you seem to be ignoring or refusing to accept the answers.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It is a needless duplication of effort. It would be like baptizing someone a second time. These holy men and woman have been formally canonized by popular acclaim and veneration. It would also probably be an ecumenical insult.

^^ This.
We’ve said over and over that the early Christian martyrs and confessors also weren’t formally canonized. They were venerated by popular acclaim. In the same manner, the Old Covenant prophets and patriarchs were venerated by tradition and public acclaim.

None of these saints need to be canonized. To canonize them would suggest that somehow they haven’t really been fully qualified saints for many centuries. When the Church changes the process for making new saints, as indeed it has done numerous times (including many changes to the canonization processes after they were adopted) we don’t need to go back and re-canonize everybody who is already on the saint rolls, which would include the patriarchs and prophets. As someone else said, existing saints are “grandfathered in” and are only removed if the Church thinks there’s some serious doubt about their existence or the facts of their life.

 

[umamibella]

Your question has been answered in this thread already by several posters but you seem to be ignoring or refusing to accept the answers.

No, I am taking it all into consideration, but am seeking a formal answer if one exists. Please do not drag this into personal attacks.

We have one Cc discussing honouring certain Old Testament figures as saints, but the rest is opnion at this point. Its perfectly fine to discuss potential answers. It could be a very simple formal answer such as no one pre a certain date can be formally canonized. Or people can be canonized at any date backwards or forwards from the time the church introduced formal canonisation.

 

[Montrose]

No, I am taking it all into consideration, but am seeking a formal answer if one exists. Please do not drag this into personal attacks.

We have one Cc discussing honouring certain Old Testament figures as saints, but the rest is opnion at this point. Its perfectly fine to discuss potential answers. It could be a very simple formal answer such as no one pre a certain date can be formally canonized. Or people can be canonized at any date backwards or forwards from the time the church introduced formal canonisation.

You have been given the answers to your question.

 

[Montrose]

The Canonization of Saints | EWTN

 

[Katie777]

They do call old testament holy people Saints.

 

[umamibella]

You have been given the answers to your question.

I seek a yes or no answer , a time period, a date, to a simple question.
Is there legally (Canon law) a date/time period in history
before which, a person cannot be formerly canonized. As of the time of posting this, it has not been answered in any link posted. I do appreciate all the links being posted

It seems to be, in retrospect, a very difficult question for which to find a concrete answer.

If I have missed it, feel free to quote the section I missed.

 

[BartholomewB]

You seem to be looking for something that isn’t there. Why would you expect canon law to make provision for canonizing people who are already saints?

 

[Montrose]

I seek a yes or no answer , a time period, a date, to a simple question.
Is there legally (Canon law) a date/tine period in history
before which, a person cannot be formerly canonized. As of the time of posting this, it has not been answered in any link posted. I do appreciate all the links being posted

It seems to be, in retrospect, a very difficult question for which to find a concrete answer.

If I have missed it, feel free to quote the section I missed.

It has nothing to do with Canon Law.

The Church has not, and there is no need to issue an official declaration about those saints prior to the formal canonization process which began in the year 993 AD.
There is no controversy and it is not a doctrinal matter.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Respectfully, I have posted to you an article and a section of the Catechism and a Wikipedia article list of the feast days of OT saints showing they are already on the liturgical calendar, all describing that canonization is unnecessary.

This is NOT “opinion”. You’re simply rejecting good, well-supported answers, for no good reason. Therefore, I will not be responding to you further, because it’s a waste of effort at this point. Good day.

Why would you expect canon law to make provision for canonizing people who are already saints?

Exactly…I can’t figure this out either. Unless it’s that both words contain the term “Canon” or something.

 

[umamibella]

You seem to be looking for something that isn’t there.

Its a quest now, to see if there has been any definitive document concerning this. The Vatican is pretty good at documents.

Why would you expect canon law to make provision for canonizing people who are already saints?

That is not what my quest is about. My question is different from that of the OP

It has nothing to do with Canon Law.

The Church has not, and there is no need to issue an official declaration about those saints prior to the formal canonization process which began in the year 993 AD.
There is no controversy and it is not a doctrinal matter.

What about people who have not been honored as saints, could they be formally canonized , those who lived prior to 993 AD
My goodness, why are people reading controversy into this where there is none.
Unbelievable!

Again, read and understand my question as it is different from that of the OP’s.

I did not state it well initially, but I did define it here

Is there legally (Canon law) a date/time period in history
before which, a person cannot be formerly canonized. As of the time of posting this, it has not been answered in any link posted. I do appreciate all the links being posted

Respectfully, I have posted to you an article and a section of the Catechism and a Wikipedia article list of the feast days of OT saints showing they are already on the liturgical calendar, all describing that canonization is unnecessary.

I acknowledged the cc you posted as to honouring saints. I feel other links are opinions and dont answer my question.

You’re simply rejecting good, well-supported answers, for no good reason. Therefore, I will not be responding to you further, because it’s a waste of effort at this point. Good day.

Have a great day Tisbearself

My question has not been answered.
Its not about

Exactly…I can’t figure this out either. Unless it’s that both words contain the term “Canon” or something.

The ‘or something’ is closer to it, given the canon in canon law, is different to the canon in canonization.

Here is my question,
Is there a definitive date before which a formal canonization cannot be had, in the Church.

Could a person who lived before the introduction of the formal process , be formally canonised, if so, how far back into history?

 

[Montrose]

Is there a definitive date before which a formal cananization cannot be had, in the Church.

The first canonization was in 993 AD. Before that no canonization. The Church will not canonize someone who is recognised by the Church as a saint prior to 993 AD.
End of story.

 

[umamibella]

The first canonization was in 993 AD. Before that no canonization. The Church will not canonize someone who is recognised by the Church as a saint prior to 993 AD.
End of story.

That is NOT my question.

Read My question

Without reading the question I clarified, your responses are bordering on harrassment. Please stop now.

 

[Montrose]

That is NOT my question.

Read My question

993 AD. That is the date. Canonizations are from that year forward. There will be no formal canonizations of saints prior to that date as they are already recognised by the Church as saints.

That is that answer to your question.

 

[umamibella]

993 AD. That is the date. Canonizations are from that year forward. There will be no formal canonizations of saints prior to that date as they are already recognised by the Church as saints.

That is that answer to your question.

Please stop, you are not reading my question.

 

[Montrose]

Is there legally (Canon law) a date/tine period in history
before which, a person cannot be formerly canonized.

993 AD. That is the date.

 

[umamibella]

993 AD. That is the date.

Say it was discovered a very holy and not well known person lived and then died in 600 AD. Previously not honoured as a saint. Could that person be formally canonised. If so, where is the church document, if not, where is the church document.

See my question now? Say a person who lived in the previous century to 1 AD. Holy, not well known or forgotten to history, rediscovered through writings, artwork or another form, What about that person.

 

[Montrose]

Say it was discovered a very holy and not well known person lived and then died in 600 AD. Previously not honoured as a saint. Could that person be formally canonised. If so, where is the church document, if not, where is the church document.

See my question now? Say a person who lived in the previous century to 1 AD. Holy, not well known or forgotten to history, rediscovered through writings, artwork or another form, What about that person.

Your question is like asking what if an undiscovered gospel is found would it be added to the bible.

There is nobody to be so recognised.
There is no Church document of any kind that covers this because it is not needed.

 

[umamibella]

Your question is like asking what if an undiscovered gospel is found would it be added to the bible.

There is nobody to be so recognised.
There is no Church document of any kind that covers this because it is not needed.

You are negating my question. It is nothing like what you are proposing. It is also way off topic. The Gospels and indeed the Bible was finished with Revelation. The history of God’s good and holy people is not finished, that book is still open.

Have a nice day