What do think of the previos Pope's beatification?

[Lamafacaja]

With all due and proper respect, along with my apologies, there is nothing that can be said which could ever get me to believe that given the sheer volume of allegations along withe the amount of publicity that His Holiness did not have any idea of the possible or even probable extent of the crimes against against the innocent. Volume and time were pointedly a part of my analogy. His Holiness was Pope when when the Bishop of a Diocese in Florida resigned after admitting his own guilt in the early years of the last decade. And publicity about other alleged crimes had already been prominent in the previous decade in this country.

I agree that it is important and also appreciated that we can have calm discussion about such a toxic subject. I state that I do not blame or lay responsibility at the feet of His Holiness for the crimes committed. All I am saying is that I strongly disagree that the adjective hroic can be used especially in regards to this subject.

There are some things which, if thought about too much or too closely could cause us to loose hope, or get very depressed, you know? So I say, best not to worry about that. Let God take care of it and carry on as best as possible in this day.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

While I know it will outrage some people here, but John Paul II’s ecumenism was always a big handicap for me when it came to debating Protestants. I felt like saying, let’s just pretend it’s 1910 and Pius X is Pope.

During the canonization process of St Pius X, the Devil’s Advocate brought forward a case by way of an impediment.

The pope was a boxer in his youth and once, as a parish priest, as he was walkling among his parishioners after Mass on Sunday, he heard one fellow curse very boldly. Reflexively, the future pope jumped on the man and knocked him out with a single punch.

After close consideration, the Vatican decided to overlook the matter . . .

St Pius X was the pope for 1910.

Pope John Paul II was undoubtedly the pope for current times. I’ve had the privilege of meeting atheists, agnostics, Muslims, and many others who were so positively impacted by the words and example of Pope John Paul II that they became very well disposed toward the Catholic Church and I have friends who actually converted because of him (and also three who became priests because of John Paul II).

1910 has come and gone. It’s time for us to spread the Catholic faith where former Catholic (traditional and triumphalist) mindsets would never have allowed it to be spread.

Alex

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Dear Friends,

Here at the Ontario Legislature, I suggested an idea to my (Baptist) legislator which he graciously accepted and went with - a bill to declare April 2nd as “Pope John Paul II Day in Ontario.”

It got as far as Second Reading debate twice, with unanimous consent from all three Parties - but the government of the day (led by a Catholic premier whose wife teaches in Catholic school) refused to enact it (and I can assure you that the premier is no traditionalist with gripes against the ecumenical spirit of Assisi . . .).

The speeches during that debate reflected the feelings of legislators from different religious and cultural backgrounds, all of whom deeply appreciated the legacy and person of Pope John Paul II. We had a petition for this day that was signed by thousands, including many Orthodox (Armenian and Coptic too!), Muslims and Jews.

One lady, who said she was baptized by John Paul II when he was a bishop in Poland, came and told me her story. I wrote it down and had my legislator present it in the Legislature.

The very next day, I received a call from that lady’s son that she had died in the night after hearing her story told in the Legislature . . .

There were people who brought candles to the Legislature for Pope John Paul II - I told them that this was not a Church or a shrine, but they insisted so I took them (and still have them here).

One Jewish friend came by to sign the petition and get others in his family to sign them - he said Pope John Paul II got his family out of Poland before the Nazis could get them.

Personally, what I admire and venerate Blessed John Paul II the most for is his bringing back solid devotion to the Most Holy Virgin Mary that had been on the wane in the Latin Catholic Church.

His practice of crowning miraculous images of Our Lady throughout the world, his devotion to the Most Holy Rosary and his presentation of the teachings of St Louis de Montfort on goving to “Jesus through Mary” - he fostered the Marian spirit in the Church in a way few popes in history have.

His ecumenical outreach, that irks the triumphalist spirit of some traditional Catholics, did more to spread goodwill throughout the world than many political conferences etc.

If that watered down Catholicism - I’d like to know where and how.

As for the quick movement of events to beatify and canonise the holy Pontiff - do we not know about the many historical precedents of the rapid canonization of saints in the West? Is it because certain Catholics don’t like the legacy of Pope John Paul II that they complain about how quickly his process is moving along? Devotion to him is everywhere, let’s get with it people!

As for the Latin Catholic liturgy - it was Pope John Paul II that brought back the Tridentine Liturgy was it not? That very many Catholics in North America don’t want to listen to the pope when it comes to this or that - that’s not new.

As for the abuse issue, let’s remember that Pope John Paul II came from a communist country where abuse scandals were specifically and frequently concocted by communist authorities to discredit the church AND to close down particular parishes. That would explain his initial reticence in accepting reported cases.

Are North American Catholics, traditionalist and otherwise, so completely innocent of knowledge of the persecution of the Catholic Church behind the Iron Curtain in this regard?

And he was the pope who didn’t stop at condemning communism - he actually did something about destroying communism.

May devotion to Blessed Pope John Paul II grow and increase among Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, and many others.

In fact, I am much more inspired by what our Orthodox brothers and sisters have written about Pope John Paul II than by what some Catholics here have said.

How sad.

Alex

 

[maurin]

There are some things which, if thought about too much or too closely could cause us to loose hope, or get very depressed, you know? So I say, best not to worry about that. Let God take care of it and carry on as best as possible in this day.

HI lamafacaja! How’re you? Happy new Year.

On the other hand there are some things which, if ignored or passed over, or whose importance or gravity is lessened, can lead to even greater evils.

Above it has been stated that the Canonization process is concerned with the state of the soul, and not with external actions. That may be true, I do not know. But I believe that the external actions of a person are indicators of the state of the soul. Thoughts?

 

[StTommyMore]

HI lamafacaja! How’re you? Happy new Year.

On the other hand there are some things which, if ignored or passed over, or whose importance or gravity is lessened, can lead to even greater evils.

Above it has been stated that the Canonization process is concerned with the state of the soul, and not with external actions. That may be true, I do not know. But I believe that the external actions of a person are indicators of the state of the soul. Thoughts?

Who are you to judge the greatest Pope of the 20th century? You do realize he went to confession EVERY DAY, right? THose actions speak volumes over the average Catholic who is so dead to sin that they do not even realize that they are doing it. (Before you accuse me of being judgmental, I include myself in that latter group).

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I’ve thought long and hard about H.H. JPII and I’m convinced he was a man of deep faith. He did not resemble, say, H.H. Pius IX, but the world was a very different place during the reign of each.

If he is deemed Blessed, I will call him such.

This is where the problem lies, at least in these threads. Some here acknowledge that Ven. John Paul II was a holy man, a man of great sanctity, but alledge he was not a great pope. I acknowledge that Blessed Pius IX was good at being pope, at doing the job, but I was troubled over his beatification when Ven John Paul II declared it: Bl. Pius IX had a notoriously bad temper and violent mood swings, which may be attributed to his epilepsy. I believe his taking Edgardo Mortara away from his parents was plain wrong (and yes, I’ve read all about it both angles, let’s not hijack the thread), just as many here believe that Ven. John Paul was just plain wrong. You say “he did not resemble, say, H.H. Pius IX.” I rejoice that he did not. Nonetheless, in the end, it is the Church that decides such matters as God makes His Will made manifest in the miracles. It is that to which we must bend.

 

[Seamus_L]

If it’s wrong to criticize John Paul II, then that same courtesy should be extended to every other Pope in history.

 

[StTommyMore]

If it’s wrong to criticize John Paul II, then that same courtesy should be extended to every other Pope in history.

The thing is there is nothing worth criticizing that would be an impediment to his beatification.

 

[maurin]

Who are you to judge the greatest Pope of the 20th century? You do realize he went to confession EVERY DAY, right? THose actions speak volumes over the average Catholic who is so dead to sin that they do not even realize that they are doing it. (Before you accuse me of being judgmental, I include myself in that latter group).

Take a deep breath, Tommy, and breathe. As I have stated more than once, I’m offering my point of view until such time that Rome has spoken and the cause is finished.

As to who I am? I’m a Faithful Catholic, and loyal son of the Church doing the best I can with what God has given me. I do not apologize for my point of view, and I certainly will not make demands on those who do not share my opinion.

If my point of view is so distasteful to you, there is little I can do, other than do my best to respect the rules of this forum in expressing my point of view, which is my privelege as a guest here, as it is yours and others.

I do not judge the greatest Pope of the twentieth century, nor any of the preceeding centuries. I just don’t share your opinion of who the greatest Pope of the twentieth century was.

 

[Melchior_1]

Bl. Pius IX had a notoriously bad temper

If it helps, St. Jerome had a legendary temper and flare for the invective as well!

 

[ProVobis]

If it’s wrong to criticize John Paul II, then that same courtesy should be extended to every other Pope in history.

Or to any other person worthy of beatification. The whole thread so far seems to be focused only on Popes worthy of same.

Don’t have to be the best or the most popular Pope in order to become a saint either. Everyone should strive to be one. The Pope just happens to be in a very high-profile position and not only within the Catholic Church.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I apologize in advance. I mean no disrespect. You have two run-on setnences with extremely long predicate nominatives and even longer extended predicates that make them difficult to comprehend. Can you rewrite them with proper punctuation and shorter sentences? It’s hard to tell how many ideas you have here. Thanks.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

LOL
Let me try again.

I just think that God has revealed through the Church that Pope John Paul II is in heaven. And for those who think that he doesn’t deserve it, they should rethink their position. Perhaps this is God’s way of telling them that what they are thinking or believing in is wrong.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

I was very, very pleased. Pope John Paul II demonstrated a holy life, in the best way possible, throughout his entire priesthood.

He was a breath of fresh air for the Church. We needed him, and the Holy Spirit sent him to us. The Church was literally falling apart, losing membership all over the world and the youth were deserting the church by the millions.

He brought them back. He showed that one can be a very religious figure, but still a very real human being. He demonstrated a traditional belief system, in a modern church.

Those “ultra-conservatives” that did not approve of him would rather enforce their concepts of “religion”, and destroy the church in the process.

They need to keep in mind that the Holy Spirit guides the church. That the Holy Spirit would never allow a leader like John Paul II to reign as long as he did, with the influence he had on the world, without his approval.

Instead of constantly fighting all change, they need to do some real prayer and reflection about why THEY put their opinions above that of the Church.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

QUOTE=The Old Medic;7468112]I was very, very pleased. Pope John Paul II demonstrated a holy life, in the best way possible, throughout his entire priesthood.

He was a breath of fresh air for the Church. We needed him, and the Holy Spirit sent him to us. The Church was literally falling apart, losing membership all over the world and the youth were deserting the church by the millions.

He brought them back. He showed that one can be a very religious figure, but still a very real human being. He demonstrated a traditional belief system, in a modern church.

Those “ultra-conservatives” that did not approve of him would rather enforce their concepts of “religion”, and destroy the church in the process.

They need to keep in mind that the Holy Spirit guides the church. That the Holy Spirit would never allow a leader like John Paul II to reign as long as he did, with the influence he had on the world, without his approval.

Instead of constantly fighting all change, they need to do some real prayer and reflection about why THEY put their opinions above that of the Church.

:clapping: :tiphat:

 

[Oneofthewomen]

I was very, very pleased. Pope John Paul II demonstrated a holy life, in the best way possible, throughout his entire priesthood.

He was a breath of fresh air for the Church. We needed him, and the Holy Spirit sent him to us. The Church was literally falling apart, losing membership all over the world and the youth were deserting the church by the millions.

He brought them back. He showed that one can be a very religious figure, but still a very real human being. He demonstrated a traditional belief system, in a modern church.

Those “ultra-conservatives” that did not approve of him would rather enforce their concepts of “religion”, and destroy the church in the process.

They need to keep in mind that the Holy Spirit guides the church. That the Holy Spirit would never allow a leader like John Paul II to reign as long as he did, with the influence he had on the world, without his approval.

Instead of constantly fighting all change, they need to do some real prayer and reflection about why THEY put their opinions above that of the Church.

:clapping::tiphat:

 

[Shoshana]

I was very, very pleased. Pope John Paul II demonstrated a holy life, in the best way possible, throughout his entire priesthood.

He was a breath of fresh air for the Church. We needed him, and the Holy Spirit sent him to us. The Church was literally falling apart, losing membership all over the world and the youth were deserting the church by the millions.

He brought them back. He showed that one can be a very religious figure, but still a very real human being. He demonstrated a traditional belief system, in a modern church.

Those “ultra-conservatives” that did not approve of him would rather enforce their concepts of “religion”, and destroy the church in the process.

They need to keep in mind that the Holy Spirit guides the church. That the Holy Spirit would never allow a leader like John Paul II to reign as long as he did, with the influence he had on the world, without his approval.

Instead of constantly fighting all change, they need to do some real prayer and reflection about why THEY put their opinions above that of the Church.

:bowdown::bowdown2:

 

[ProVobis]

And for those who think that he doesn’t deserve it, they should rethink their position.

They’ll always be people who think certain saints didn’t/don’t deserve to be saints. What’s your point? Thinking someone doesn’t deserve it (or the recognition thereof) is not the same as not accepting the fact of their sainthood.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

They’ll always be people who think certain saints didn’t/don’t deserve to be saints. What’s your point? Thinking someone doesn’t deserve it (or the recognition thereof) is not the same as not accepting the fact of their sainthood.

Catholics do have an obligation to “think with the Church.” If we don’t agree with something the Church has done, perhaps an exercise of true humility would be to accept that the problem lies with us and not with the Church.

Having studied saints and hagiography for years, I just can’t imagine a single saint in the Catholic calendar I would not think deserved to be there.

Alex

 

[Lamafacaja]

HI lamafacaja! How’re you? Happy new Year.

And to you, too! I hope all is well

On the other hand there are some things which, if ignored or passed over, or whose importance or gravity is lessened, can lead to even greater evils.

I just don’t know that there’s anything we personally can do about this. So, I’m inclined to let it go and leave it to the powers that be.

Above it has been stated that the Canonization process is concerned with the state of the soul, and not with external actions. That may be true, I do not know. But I believe that the external actions of a person are indicators of the state of the soul. Thoughts?

**[Edited by moderator] **

:shrug:

 

[jtodisco]

I am very pleased that Pope John Paul II is going to be pronounced a blessed. I look forward to the day when he will be officially proclaimed a saint. As for all the comments regarding any and every questionable thing Pope John Paul II ever did while he was Pope I think some people need to remember that all the saints have made mistakes and sinned in the past. Some of the most amazing saints were horrible sinners prior to their conversion (i.e. Saint Francis of Assisi, Saint Augustine, etc.)

Also, I do not think John Paull II did anything wrong in keeping a warm dialogue open between Catholicism and the other faiths. And regarding the nonsense that has been promoted earlier in this thread concerning Islam, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is very clear about this:

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

and

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as “a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life.”

For anyone who claims to support the Church it is strange that they should question the current Pope and Magesterium’s decision regarding John Paul II. Also, since some have claimed that they can’t think of any Saints who have had the process of canonization begin prior to the traditional 5 year waiting period a few I can think of off the top of my head include: Saint Francis of Assisi and the Blessed Mother Teresa. I know there are more, but those are the only two I can recall from memory.