Why some conservative Catholics want to stop Pope John Paul II being made a saint

[Joe_5859]

If I recall correctly, only a handful of popes over the 2,000 years of the Church have been canonized. However, 3 of the most recent 5 late popes are in some stage of the process (Pius XII, Bl John XXIII, John Paul II). My concern is that at some level even just *being *pope seems to have become equated with the level of “heroic virtue” associated with sainthood.

Only a handful of popes canonized? That’s simply not true.

Look at a list of the popes. 55 of the first 58 popes are saints. All total, 77 of the 266 popes have been canonized and 10 have been beatified.

That means about 1 in every 3 popes has been either beatified or canonized. Far more than a handful.

It is in the darkest of times that God raises up the most saints. We live in dark times. It does not surprise me to see many saints being raised up, along with many holy popes. Is the Communion of Saints a country club that becomes somehow less special the more that the membership increases?

If being pope was synonomous with the heroic virtue necessary for sainthood, all 266 popes would be saints. That is not the case either. But, with the pope being the Vicar of Christ on earth, led by the Holy Spirit in ways that we can’t even imagine, and the beneficiary of prayers being said by millions of Catholics all over the world on a daily basis, is it really surprising that more than a few popes do exhibit heroic virtue? We should rejoice over that, not lament it.

 

[Joe_5859]

I think we’re seeing the downside of a rushed-through canonization now, with Fr Escriva; unless many more miracles are attributed to his intercession, he’ll keep that Roger Maris-like asterisk next to his name since he was canonized under lowered standards. Pope Benedict re-raised the standards immediately after becoming pope
chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/187701?eng=y scroll down to part 2.
so the exact same problem won’t happen of course.
Admittedly, it’s unclear whether “In other words: the pride and entrepreneurship of a religious order toward their founder or confrere are not enough” refers to Fr Escriva or Fr Maciel, then on his deathbed. My guess is the second. Which provides a segue into the other problem with JPII’s canonization: he didn’t seem to care that tens or hundreds of thousands of children were being molested by priests. His infamous “Maciel is an efficacious guide to youth” must be overcome since the pope has a strong obligation to guard his lambs against omnisexual monster-priests.

But that’s just my opinion.

You’re right about one thing: that is just your opinion.

According to the Church, it is Saint Josemaria Escriva. The Church places no asterisks next to any one’s names. He’s a saint just as much as any other saint.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

If I recall correctly, only a handful of popes over the 2,000 years of the Church have been canonized. However, 3 of the most recent 5 late popes are in some stage of the process (Pius XII, Bl John XXIII, John Paul II). My concern is that at some level even just *being *pope seems to have become equated with the level of “heroic virtue” associated with sainthood.

Don’t forget Bl. Pius IX who was made blessed the same day Bl. John XXIII was. It has been a long time since he died and he still hasn’t been made a saint and if anybody is deserving of sainthood it is Bl. Pius IX.

I will say that it is far easier to go through the process with current individuals because living witnesses is a big help and there are better records now than long ago.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Pope John Paul II may not have been perfect but neither is Pope Benedict XVI or any of the popes of the past. If you ask me, Pope John Paul II was a very good pope and he is definitely deserving of sainthood.

Thank goodness, one doesn’t have to be perfect to got straight to heaven, only in a state of grace and with a current plenary indulgence.

 

[Tigg]

Just a reminder…there are other controversies as well. Wasn’t JP II given an award by the Italian Freemasons for helping spread and promote their ideals? As I remember, the award was given back to them after it was questioned whether or not to be appropriate.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

For hundreds of years, starting with the first martyrs of the early Church, saints were chosen by public acclaim. The Catholics of the world have made their will known regarding John Paul the Great. If the Church agrees with that public acclaim than who are we to question?

 

[DrivingReport]

Here’s a good quote from Mother Angelica that may help spread some light on this subject about the Sainthood:

[One of the problems with reading the lives of the saints is that you’re reading about people who have achieved a high degree of union with God. Rarely included are the multitudinous rises and falls they experienced; or the time it took them to get to that place of union. They never write about the struggle, they always write about the end result.]… [Our saints had faults. There’s only one Immaculate Conception and there ain’t any others]

Guess what guys, even Saints sin. Even Saints make mistakes.

Yes, Pope John Paul II, made some mistakes. Yes, he kissed the Koran (I think that’s what it’s called). But honestly guys, haven’t we all did things we really shouldn’t have?

There are people who live not so holy lives who then converst during the last seconds before they die.

Look at Mother Teresa. She had “temptations toward doubt” (Fr. Johnathan Morris on youtube.com/watch?v=zzhbtG_iXpg&feature=channel_page)

Anyway, just thought I would throw my two cents in.

 

[JKS]

;

Guess what guys, even Saints sin. Even Saints make mistakes.

Yes, Pope John Paul II, made some mistakes. Yes, he kissed the Koran (I think that’s what it’s called). But honestly guys, haven’t we all did things we really shouldn’t have?

There are people who live not so holy lives who then convert during the last seconds before they die.

Look at Mother Teresa. She had “temptations toward doubt” (Fr. Johnathan Morris on youtube.com/watch?v=zzhbtG_iXpg&feature=channel_page)

Okay, maybe this post should be titled “Why some conservatives want to slow JPII’s canonization”: A saint is someone who is in heaven. My great-great (nun) aunt who perished in the Holocaust is or will be a saint most likely. Timothy McVeigh repented before his execution and therefore will likely upgrade from Purgatory eventually-yay! But canonization is a different story: the Church offers canonized saints as models of virtue in an aspect of their lives. I think there was another pope who was saintly but whose reign was a disaster in many ways, who was canonized?

The bit about Mother Teresa: She resisted great temptations? That’s what we’re looking for in a saint!

Kissing the Koran isn’t a mistake but a sin; for a pope to do that, is scandal, and a grave sin. Promoting Maciel was terrible; Cardinal Sodano and Dwiwicz need to come forward about their role in keeping information from JPII about that monster.

 

[Phil_Core]

Read more: blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100006738/why-some-conservative-catholics-want-to-stop-pope-john-paul-ii-being-made-a-saint/

How did Pope John Paul II damage the Church? When the term ‘conservative Catholic’ is used, what does that mean? What is a ‘liberal Catholic?’ Is there a place where we who worship God and share the same faith, have a meeting place? Did not Jesus say, " to love God with your whole heart and soul and your neighbor as yourself?" How are we doing that is we are labeling one another?

The world, our nation and its people appear so divided. It appears to be the best time to reach out to one another and find our common ground and our love to give.

Peace and all Good,

Your brother,

 

[Joe_5859]

Kissing the Koran isn’t a mistake but a sin; for a pope to do that, is scandal, and a grave sin. Promoting Maciel was terrible; Cardinal Sodano and Dwiwicz need to come forward about their role in keeping information from JPII about that monster.

I don’t know about you, but I would be extremely cautious about accusing a pope of being guilty of, not just a sin but a grave sin. Did I miss something in the Catechism that calls kissing the Koran a sin?

 

[JKS]

I don’t know about you, but I would be extremely cautious about accusing a pope of being guilty of, not just a sin but a grave sin.

Yeah, but it’s not a grave sin for me to opine that; my canonization is still on track.

 

[JReducation]

If we go back to the basics and remember that a decree of canonization is a solemn decree from the Roman Pontif that a man or woman is in heaven. It is not a act that makes someone a saint.

If John Paul II lived a heroic and virtuous life, the fact that he made choices and did things that do not meet the approval of some members of the Church does not take away from his holiness and heroic virtue. Heroic virtue is not always visible to the observer.

When the study is complete, if the result is that this man, who seems to have been contraversial, did indeed live a life of heroic virtue, the contraversies around his leadership or his actions would have little relevance on the fact. He lived a heroic life, because he lived it according to his conscience and his gifts.

There are many saints who were contraversial figures, but the result was that they were heroes, even when the world thought they were not. Some people questioned the canonization of St. Francis of Assisi, because Pope Gregory IX decided that he did not need a study of Francis’ life. He rejected the very idea of a beatification or waiting for a miracle. Gregory based his decision on his personal relationship with Francis when Gregory was a Cardinal and Francis was the founder of the Friars Minor. Yet, Pope Gregory challenged the papal court to take him on this one. No one did. Gregory traveled to Assisi just to canonize his old friend. Today, there would be those who would question such action on the part of a pope. Francis had not been dead two-years. The same thing happened with St. Clare. The pope, who was her good friend waved all the requirements and traveled to Assisi to canonize her.

The point is that a decree of canonization is a de fide decree from the Vicar of Christ who is guided by the Holy Spirit to proclaim that this man or woman is to be included among the saints of the Church, because they are saints, not because the pope made them saints.

The popularity or lack thereof are is not as important as is the faith of the pope who makes the decreee. If Benedict XVI wants to canonize John Paul II and bypass all the protocol, who can question him? This is part of his ministry as Peter.

Once a pope does declare that someone is in heaven, there is nothing else for the Catholic Church to do, but to drop the subject and accept it. It is not one of those things that is up for discussion after the decree is done. You would have to uncover something that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is not a heroic Christian.

On this issue, like all others, we have to proceed from the assumption that God is good and whatever happens, happens for some higher good.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JKS]

Canonizing JPII will be a slap in the face to me and many other survivors; don’t count on many of them returning to the Church if it goes forward. Do you, like JPII, think he had no obligation to the children who were being raped by priests?

 

[Digitonomy]

Canonizing JPII will be a slap in the face to me and many other survivors; don’t count on many of them returning to the Church if it goes forward. Do you, like JPII, think he had no obligation to the children who were being raped by priests?

It’s fair to give your opinion that John Paul didn’t do enough on this issue. However, I would be cautious in asserting that you know what he thought.

 

[Joe_5859]

Yeah, but it’s not a grave sin for me to opine that; my canonization is still on track.

I hope you’re joking here. Sadly, I think you are not.

Opining about the faults of our neighbor certainly can be a grave sin:

CCC 2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. [278] He becomes guilty:

• of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;

• of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them; [279]

• of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.

[278] Cf. CIC, can. 220.
[279] Cf. Sir 21:28.

Neither you nor I have any idea of John Paul II’s knowledge of the sexual sins of certain priests. For us to assume JPII did have knowledge could very well fall under rash judgment. For us to present as fact comments in that regard on a public internet forum could constitute calumny.

We should not be so quick to pass bad judgments on people and situations where our knowledge is so incomplete. That is a scandal.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I hope you’re joking here. Sadly, I think you are not

I thought the poster was joking about his “own canonization” being “on track.” I doubt he means it, particularly because he is apparently still alive.

 

[Joe_5859]

I thought the poster was joking about his “own canonization” being “on track.” I doubt he means it, particularly because he is apparently still alive.

That’s what I thought. But after reading some of their other posts in this thread, I began to have doubts.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Canonizing JPII will be a slap in the face to me and many other survivors; don’t count on many of them returning to the Church if it goes forward. Do you, like JPII, think he had no obligation to the children who were being raped by priests?

I am so sorry for everyone who has suffered at the hands of abusive anybodies - teachers, priests, parents, postal carriers, anybody. Anyone who would sexually abuse a child should be staked naked over an ant hill face down… Leaving Christ’s Church and abandoning one’s salvation because you have been wronged by an evil person, does seem to be cutting off your nose to spite your face. An individual sinned against you, the Church hierarchy shares culpability for the sin, but the doctrines and the sacraments these belong to God and to exclude yourself from them because you have been hurt by people is very shortsighted. People cannot help how they feel, but they can help what they do with and about those feelings and separating oneself from the Sacraments because of those feelings just doesn’t make sense.

 

[Tigg]

Canonizing JPII will be a slap in the face to me and many other survivors; don’t count on many of them returning to the Church if it goes forward. Do you, like JPII, think he had no obligation to the children who were being raped by priests?

I am sorry for you all - would it help ease the pain to remember that there has always been a human and Divine element to our Church? That despite the hideous personal sins of the priests, they cannot invalidate the Sacraments nor defile that Sacred Element which is your means to a sharing in the very life of Christ and your redemption? God Bless You!

 

[JReducation]

Canonizing JPII will be a slap in the face to me and many other survivors; don’t count on many of them returning to the Church if it goes forward. Do you, like JPII, think he had no obligation to the children who were being raped by priests?

As I said above, a decree of canonization is simply a statement of faith that the person has lived a saintly life and is in heaven. The Church does not produce saints. God does. If John Paul II is a sain, then it is God who made him one.

Regardless of the sins of men, we cannot place conditions on God’s mercy. I am reminded of the mother of Maria Goretti. Neither she nor Maria placed conditions on God’s mercy and today, Alessandro, Maria’s murderer is up for beatification and the most outspoken supporter of his cause was Maria’s mother who testified many long hours as to his holiness. He eventually died as a Capuchin Franciscan and lived a very holy life in the friary.

The point is, that we are hurt by sin and we cannot deny that we are hurt. But we cannot deny the other truth either. God has mercy and only God knows what is in the mind and heart of a person. If John Paul’s mind and heart were saintly, then God in his mercy would allow him to enter heaven as a saint. We can’t let our indignation dictate what God should or should not do. To leave the Church, if John Paul were canonized, is not a statement about the Church. It is a statement about God. It would equate to saying that God has no right to raise someone to the altar of sanctity. We can’t do that either. Justice has to be even handed. Victims have to be helped and acknowledged. Also God’s rights have to be upheld.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF