What do think of the previos Pope's beatification?

  • Thread starter Thread starter maurin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

maurin

Guest
I was disappointed. I really believed Pope Benedict was taking the Church in a Traditional direction, but with the new Assisi and now the beatification, it is obvious that the status quo will be maintained.

That’s my unqualified opinion. Yours?
 
I rejoice that the Ven. Pope John Paul II will be beatified and I hope I live to see him raised to the honors of the Altar. I’m having a dinner for friends and a decorated cake on May 1.
 
This is what John Vennari had to say:

**John Paul II to be “Beatified” **

*A note from John Vennari *

The Vatican has announced it will beatify Pope John Paul II in a ceremony on May 1.

The announcement is cause for consternation. This is a move to beatify the Pope who promoted a Masonic-styled pan-religious ecumenism, who effectively told the Jews they have their own Covenant independent from Christ, who kissed the Koran, who glorified in rock’n’roll and pagan inculturatred liturgies, who appointed faithless and feckless bishops, whose official point-man for Protestants (Cardinal Kasper) publicly said Vatican II did away with the notion that non-Catholics need to convert, who presided over the worst clerical scandal in history, and whose consistant words and actions interpreted Vatican II as a radical discontinuity with Catholic Tradition.

With respect, we cannot but regard this as bad judgment on the part of Pope Benedict. This will only serve to “hallow” all of those modernist words and acts of John Paul II, including the Assisi that Pope Benedict now wants to celebrate. “How can you find fault with Assisi when it was the program of ‘Blessed John Paul II’”?

There is no logic or true Faith involved with this decision, only shallow sentiment at its worst that places beatifications on the same level as the Academy Awards.

For more, see: “The Secret of John Paul II’s Success” cfnews.org/JP2-Success.htm ]

In the words of the Fatima Message, “Pray a great deal for the Holy Father.”
 
I think it is AWESOME!!! I am so happy Pope John Paul 2 will be beatified! He truly deserves it. He was honestly one of the best Popes the Church has ever had. I truly miss him and I honestly wish I could have met him.

I was only 15 when he passed away. I’m sure he’s in heaven right now standing beside Saint Peter, looking over us and praying for us as well.

God bless that man and our current Pope as well. He’s a great guy as well.
 
I have a sneaking suspicion that this thread is not long for this forum. 🙂
 
I am happy that Pope John Paul II will be beatified. He is perhaps the main reason I am Roman Catholic today. Like Pope Benedict XVI, he reached out to people outside the Church, drawing us closer to Christ and into the Catholic Church.
 
I do not understand what issues people have with this.

A beatification, and later a canonization, are just recognizing the work that God has already done.

If you have issues with this then I think your issues are with God, not the Church, not the Pope, but God as it is His work that is being acknowledged by the Church.
 
I am sad that canon law was abrogated. The Pope was hardly passed on five months before his gloriously-reigning successor started the canonisation process. You’re supposed to give it five years after death. The only saint I know of who was canonised before five years had gone by was St. Anthony of Padua, two years after death (there are probably more). St. Anthony did not have interfaith prayer with Albigensians. Why should this principle not apply across the world, and forever?
 
I am sad that canon law was abrogated. The Pope was hardly passed on five months before his gloriously-reigning successor started the canonisation process. You’re supposed to give it five years after death. The only saint I know of who was canonised before five years had gone by was St. Anthony of Padua, two years after death. St. Anthony did not have interfaith prayer with Albigensians.
The beatification will be just short of 6 years after his death.
 
The beatification will be just short of 6 years after his death.
Indeed, but I was under the impression that one had to wait five years before beginning the process of canonisation, not realising it.
 
I think it is wonderful. If God chooses to grant a miracle in order to validate his beatification, who am I to disagree!!! And who is John Venarri that I should put any trust in him?
 
I think it is wonderful. If God chooses to grant a miracle in order to validate his beatification, who am I to disagree!!! And who is John Venarri that I should put any trust in him?
Well said!!! :):)🙂
 
I am disappointed as well, although HH Pope John II was the channel of grace for my conversion to the Faith (I will always have a soft spot and gratitude for him), however he presided over the scandalous Assisi peace gatherings, the awful koran incident and his strange ecumenism. He allowed the litrugy to go to pot, permitted too much dissent and the Church on earth is still in a terrible state. Saying that, I am glad that I am not Pope…
 
I am sad that canon law was abrogated. The Pope was hardly passed on five months before his gloriously-reigning successor started the canonisation process. You’re supposed to give it five years after death. The only saint I know of who was canonised before five years had gone by was St. Anthony of Padua, two years after death (there are probably more). St. Anthony did not have interfaith prayer with Albigensians. Why should this principle not apply across the world, and forever?
Saint Homobonus (a married layman, btw) died (not as a martyr) in November 1197, and was canonized in January 1199. (That’s fourteen months if you haven’t done the math yet.) So at which point in history was it, exactly, that speedy canonizations were not “traditional”?

As for John Paul II, I say: dignus et iustus est!
 
I do not understand what issues people have with this.

A beatification, and later a canonization, are just recognizing the work that God has already done.

If you have issues with this then I think your issues are with God, not the Church, not the Pope, but God as it is His work that is being acknowledged by the Church.
I do not think my issues with this have any relation to having issues with God. My issues with this are related to the actions of the previous Pope. The very public actions. Those actions are certainly debatable. I respect the previous Pope’s obvious love of God. I do not respect some of the ways he publicly manifested that love. No, my issues vare not with God at all, but with the free actions of a man.
 
I thank God for this gift in my life…and in the lives of so many! John Paul the Great is my hero and I have no qualms in him beatified. We have no idea the whole of his life…and I have read about 2,000 pages of books on him. He is a Saint in my life…just as Mother Theresa is.

Thank you Lord!
 
I am disappointed as well, although HH Pope John II was the channel of grace for my conversion to the Faith (I will always have a soft spot and gratitude for him), however he presided over the scandalous Assisi peace gatherings, the awful koran incident and his strange ecumenism. He allowed the litrugy to go to pot, permitted too much dissent and the Church on earth is still in a terrible state. Saying that, I am glad that I am not Pope…
As I just posted on another thread, had I been the “Devil’s Advocate” for the process (as in the olden days), those are the exact things I would bring up as part of my duties and would do so without pulling any punches.

I would then rejoice at being roundly defeated and will happily attend his canonization.

John Paul II was no monster and while he undoubtedly had imprudent missteps and could have done more to fix our liturgy and appoint better bishops, a canonization is an infallible definition that a person is now in heaven. I would see it that a person, despite his faults is now in heaven with God, a testament to God’s mercy. If horrible sinners like St. Augustine and St. Paul could make it, why not Pope John Paul II?
 
I am afraid it is being rushed. Is the miracle really a miracle? There have certainly been some questions about the illness the nun had and I know Parkinson’s diagnosis is never a slam dunk.

JPII had many wonderful qualities and talents. He has given us many great writings. But is it really the actions of a saint, who by many accounts, turned a nearly blind eye to the priest scandals and refused to accept the truth about his friend Maciel?

These issues have done immeasurable harm to the Church, which I have no doubt the Holy Spirit will bring good fruit from. But, I think JPIIs handling of them needs much further study and reflection. I don’t want to see further harm come from declaring him beatified and having some horrible revelation about what he knew and covered up coming out after. What is the rush?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top