Why is John Paul the Second a saint?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peppers123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
True. I watched the movie “Karol: A man who became Pope” which was 3 hours of his ministry before becoming pope. It was very insperational and I recommend it and the sequel “Karol: The Pope the man” it helped me get to know him more.
 
I have read that it was not unheard of in Communist Poland for priests to be falsely accused of improprieties. It could be that Pope St. John Paul II became very suspicious of these kinds of allegations against the clergy.

Also, apparently 3 of the 4 Bishops gave “inaccurate and incomplete” information to Pope St. John Paul II regarding McCarrick.

Thus, taken together–suspicious information and a past of seeing priests being maligned–this all probably seriously factored into his decision. We have the benefit of hindsight now, but he didn’t. It’s a terrible situation, to be sure, but he still is a Saint. He lived a heroic life of virtue and died in a state of sanctifying grace.
 
Last edited:
Show me the dogma where I must believe St. Leo for example is a saint in heaven in order that I may be saved. While I appreciate your paper it makes a leap in that regard, that I must believe that a particular saint is a saint in heaven order to be saved, for example your citation 15, your paper implies that these are ex cathedra statements, which they are not. I notice you liked the two in your article.

There have been only two ex cathedra statements since vatican 1. More previous to that definition in vatican 1, but that is another topic.

Implying erroneously to catholics that it is a requirement of salvation is at minimum misleading.
 
I might have been incorrect in my characterization of the way the Catechism defined it, so I deleted that post. The simplest way to say this is that papal canonizations are dogmatic facts, which means that they are not dogma themselves, but are closely connected to it.

If you read the C.D.F.'s commentary on the Profession of Faith, it lists papal canonizations amongst a bunch of other teachings which are to be definitively held. This means that they are infallible.
 
Last edited:
[1/2] If you want to know where all of this comes from, this shows the lineage:

The first place to start would be the Divinely revealed definition of Vatican I concerning Papal infallibility, which states:
"We teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman pontiff speaks ex cathedra, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable.”
Click to expand...
Vatican II, in Lumen Gentium Section 25, interpreting this infallibility, states:
“And this is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff… enjoys when… by a definitive act he proclaims a doctrine of faith or morals. And therefore his definitions… are justly styled irreformable… therefore they need no approval of others, nor do they allow an appeal to any other judgment.”
Click to expand...
Canon Law furthers this interpretation with Can. 749 §1, stating:
“By virtue of his office, the Supreme Pontiff possesses infallibility in teaching when as the supreme pastor and teacher of all the Christian faithful, who strengthens his brothers and sisters in the faith, he proclaims by definitive act that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held."
Click to expand...
Canon 750 §2, describing our obligation in these matters, states:
“Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firmly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Therefore, everything that is proposed to be held definitively is to be held as an infallible, irreformable truth.

The Pope, in his authority to bind upon the Faithful by a definitive act, is not limited by a number of miracles, nor a “reduced rigor”, as some would argue. Rather, this authority, as Divinely revealed by Vatican I and expounded upon by Vatican II, is exercised in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority when defining a doctrine on Faith and morals, which also includes truths “intimately connected” with the Faith and truths “with which they are connected either for historical reasons or by a logical relationship” to Faith and morals. Indeed, the “communion of Saints” is so fundamental to Faith that we must profess it, with Divine Faith under penalty of heresy, in the Apostles’ Creed.
 
Last edited:
Nicene said:
Show me the dogma where I must believe St. Leo for example is a saint in heaven in order that I may be saved.
Click to expand...
Your position reduces the Church’s elevation of Saints to just one Popes opinion of who is a Saint. Is that right?
 
Last edited:
See the following:
“But the infallible authority of the Church is by no means confined to the teaching of “dogmas.” The Church is not only the teacher of revealed truth, she is also its guardian; and in the office of protecting God’s truth against error she needs to pronounce infallibly upon many matters which, although they are not formally revealed by God, are nevertheless intimately connected with revelation. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that Catholics are bound under pain of grave sin to believe the truths thus infallibly taught by the Church. They are not dogmas, indeed, because in themselves they have not been revealed by God. Hence the motive of the assent which we give to them is not the divine authority. We believe them on the authority of the Catholic Church, inasmuch as she is exercising her office of guardian of revealed truth, an office committed to her by God himself. Evidently, therefore, refusal to believe them would be a serious sin against the virtue of faith.”
Click to expand...

Library : Faith and Revealed Truth (Part I)

Faith and Revealed Truth (Part I) The first part of a summary of Catholic Doctrine, arranged and edited by the Rev. George D. Smith, D.D., Ph.D.
www.catholicculture.org www.catholicculture.org
 
Last edited:
Its a very sad day when one of the greatest popes of all time is having his sainthood questioned. Whether some people have doubts or not, miracles occurred and he is a Saint. This isn’t something open for debate.
 
Last edited:
[2/2]

(this was my second part to my post above, couldn’t post it then)

Thus, when a Pope canonizes a Saint, he declares (translated to English), “For the honour of the Blessed Trinity, the exaltation of the Catholic Faith… by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ… we declare and define…to be a Saint…decreeing that they are to be venerated as such by the whole Church.” Mirroring the declaration of Vatican I, the Pope invokes his authority from Our Lord to declare and define a truth upon the whole Church.

There can be no doubt that canonization is both “a solemn act”, as stated by Pope St. John Paul II in the Apostolic Constitution Divinus Perfectionis Magister, and that it is “definitive” and “preceptive”, as described by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints in the following:
“Canonization is the supreme glorification by the Church of a Servant of God raised to the honours of the altar with a decree declared definitive and preceptive for the whole Church, involving the solemn Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff.”
Click to expand...
Thus, since the Pope can speak definitively on matters of Faith and morals, and since Sainthood is unquestionably part of the Faith, the Pope can speak definitively on canonizations, which is what occurs when he “declares and defines”(decernimus et definimus). All Catholics, therefore, are required to definitively hold these canonizations as infallible, irreformable truths.
 
Last edited:
When the Church infallibly declares something and a person deliberately goes against it, it defies the Church. And not just in an opinion but in a revealed Truth. That would indeed be grave matter. One can say, maybe the canonization of JPII was rash or quick. But one cannot day he is not in heaven.
 
Last edited:
The Church will always have those who attack, both from without and within.

Revelation 12:10.
 
Last edited:
If you would like to read about his life and who he was, check out the following:

https://fjp2.com/

There are many articles to get a sense of the Pope and Saint.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top