Mess with the bull, you get the horns!! Or something like that.
Jimmy Akin, the ginger-haired sage at the National Catholic Register, has called me to an Aaron Burr / Alexander Hamilton like duel over the issue of Papal sainthood!
I, as stated in my very wise post of this morning, I prefer a wise, thoughtful, and slowly paced canonization process.
Akin, however, clearly prefers the fast-food super-sized McSaint process.
Ok. He doesn’t actually prefer the McSaint process. I am just making that up. But he does prefer a middle-moderate way, and we all know that nothing good ever came of that!! Can I hear an amen?
So go read Jimmy’s folly here. But know this. One day, in the not so distant future Jimmy will rue the day he disagreed with me in public! Well, maybe rue is a strong word. Perhaps there will be pangs of mild regret. Oh, there will be pangs!
January 17, 2011 at 10:38 pm
Do you know the name of the Italian Priest that is to be beatified and canonized on the same day, that day being May 1st, May Day?
*
January 17, 2011 at 11:05 pm
Pat, you're right and Akin is wrong. PJPII may have had many admirable qualities. But, IMHO, it's just too soon to consider canonization. There are a lot of issues in his back trail. One of those issues is the priest sex abuse scandal. Many of our good Catholics, (especially the families of the victims) feel he didn't do enough to stop the abuse when he was informed of it. Some claim he didn't do nothing at all. It seems to me that there should be a very long investigation of his actions in this matter to prove or disprove that he did the right things. Bring back the devil's advocate so a fair investigation can be made into this aspect of his papacy.
January 17, 2011 at 11:47 pm
Scotju,
I also tend to favor a slower process, but I think the child abuse reason you cite isn't compelling.
JPII was slow to respond to the child abuse crisis. But because the Communists in Poland routinely tried to discredit priests with charges of homosexuality and other sexual depravities, he didn't believe the rumors and was slow to believe the actual charges.
By the time the scandal blew up he was pretty infirm and I doubt he had a full grasp of the scandal and it's severity.
With all that said, one could questio his wisdom in this matter. Just like one could question the wisdom of kissing the Koran at Assisi. But I don't think his personal holiness are in question, which is the issue regarding canonization.
therecusant
January 18, 2011 at 12:34 am
Personally, I am very glad that this, and many other things, are in the hands of our Holy Mother, the Church. Since we claim to believe in the Church, including papal infallability, why don't we just trust that those declared saints are done so properly, whether it is done in 5 years or in 50? Why muddy the issue with our own preferences and "wisdom"?
January 18, 2011 at 1:04 am
Amen, Fr. Michael!
January 18, 2011 at 4:22 am
Oh, there will be pangs. And even more pangs yet if the cured nun proves not-so-cured if the cause does not wait for her to die a natural death and prove the miracle is lasting.
Fr. Michael – will all due respect, we are all members of this Church. There is no magical "them" out there who always acts in the best interest of the Body of Christ. We think together, we reason together, and we bring each other to the truth together. Good bishops and cardinals read widely and glean wisdom, inspiration and cautions from even the humblest sources. Turning laypeoples minds to the "OFF" setting is to limit greatly how the Holy Spirit works in the world.
January 18, 2011 at 4:52 am
Be careful, Pat. Jimmy will have a full-fledged Saint on his side soon!
Susan
January 18, 2011 at 11:00 am
Blackrep, I believe that consensus-heavy model of the Church that you
are proposing is a bad idea. Think of what would have happened if
Pope Paul VI had gone with the consensus of bishops and the laity
of the developed world when he made his decision re: promulgating
'Humanae Vitae'. He went ahead in the teeth of savage opposition
and derision from priests, laity, bishops– and even his own curia.
And, as we have seen, every syllable of that encyclical was prophetic
truth.
(Interesting tidbit: Karol Cardinal Wojtyla played a major role in the
drafting of that encyclical.)
I do believe that there is indeed a magical "them" out there who always
act in the best interest of the Body of Christ. Actually, I believe in a
divine Him Who always acts in the best interest of His Body the Church.
And He gave authority to the Pope and his brother bishops to teach,
sanctify and govern the faithful in spiritual matters. That would, of
course, include the canonization of saints. I don't believe it means I
have my mind in the "OFF" setting when I say that the Holy Father,
who has already consulted with quite a number of people about this,
doesn't have to run this beatification by me so I can sign off on it.
January 18, 2011 at 1:04 pm
I am a non-Catholic, so I have a question. I am being sincere.
It seems from the debate on whether John Paul II should be made a saint in a slow process or in a fast process, that sainthood is something simply made up by people.
Can people make a person a saint by declaring him or her to be one?
Shouldn't it really be up to–I don't know–God?
January 18, 2011 at 2:02 pm
God makes the decision, but leaves the timing of the announcement up to us.
It was not just a question of child sex abuse, but of Fr Maciel, kissing the Koran, the show business of WYD, etc.
January 18, 2011 at 2:18 pm
renaissanceguy,
People don't declare a person a Saint, the Church does, and it does after careful consideration of a whole host of evidence. The person's life is studied in detail, gone over with a fine-toothed comb. They are first declared a Servant of God, then Venerable (the current stage for JPII), then Blessed (Blessed Pope John Paul II, come May 1), then Canonization. Wikipedia actually has a pretty good outline of the procedure.
To best answer your final question is this: God makes them Saints in Heaven, the Church merely declares it on Earth.
I point to the necessity of miracles performed by God after prayers for the intercession of the Venerable/Blessed. If God doesn't want the Church to recognize a person as a saint, the miracle won't occur or won't meet the requirements in place (usually miraculous cures, unexplainable by doctors).
The whole process hasn't been done haphazardly for JPII. The case for Beatification was submitted almost 4 years ago, and there's no telling how much time will elapse between Beatification and Canonization. Another miracle is still required as well, which will come in God's time, not ours. Mother Teresa is a Blessed, as are Pius IX, John XXIII, John Henry Newman, and a host of others.
Many causes take longer, simply because of (as Fr. Z pointed out) organization and availability of information. Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha isn't known by a lot of people, there is less information about her life, it's harder to dig out information, and fewer people are praying for her intercession. Thus the steps along the way can take longer.
I guess I just don't see anything to be upset about. The Pope will be declared Blessed, and is rapidly moving through the process of Canonization, helped (of course) by the waiving of the traditional 5 year waiting period. But come May 1 he won't be declared a Saint.
I don't recall people being overly concerned about the speed of Blessed Teresa's beatification.
January 18, 2011 at 3:00 pm
Pope John Paul II gave executive orders to the American bishops whom He called to Rome over the abuse scandal. Pope John Paul II said "one abuse and the priest is OUT" The bishops returned to Dallas and said "THREE times and the priest is OUT". When he was ignored, Pope John Paul II took himself to the chapel and prayed the rosary. If anything Pope John Paul II should have censured the bishops over disobedience. Pope Benedict XVI directed that "ONCE, and the abuser is turned over to the secular police."
The Cathedral of St. Francis in Asissi has been demolished by an earthquake. Needless to say that God is not pleased.
I liked the post about the miracles. If God works miracles through a person then that person is sainted.
January 18, 2011 at 3:11 pm
Thanks for the explanation.
January 18, 2011 at 3:54 pm
When high churchmen came to John Paul II and told him about the abuse stories he didn't believe them, probably because crying homosexual was an old tactic of the communists in Poland but he was completely snowed by guys like Fr. Marciel. Personally holy but a terrible judge of character, bless his heart.
January 18, 2011 at 5:53 pm
Guys,
A miracle happened by John Paul II's intercession. And the Pope cannot hide that. That would be unjust and living a lie. Another thing is that the popes are not bound by Church laws. They make the laws. They are the Law-Givers. So the law is almost Perfunctary. Most of us often wonder why they even bother making laws for popes, when everyone knows that the pope can change them or dispense with them. I believe that they exist more for the sake of information, as a way of telling the rest of us how the pope will proceed in certain situations. But they are not guarrantees that he will do so.
Patrick with all due respect, what you are saying is that we should pretend the miracle never happened. YOU CAN'T DO THAT!
January 20, 2011 at 2:20 am
What is the rush? A fast process erodes credibility. Everyone always says the Church moves slowly, but here she is making one of her own a celebrity at full steam? Simply seems hugely rash, and a disservice. If JPII is to be sainted, it would prove much more convincing to wait. Another media blunder. Meanwhile we are told any real reforms will takes decades. Cognitive dissonance, anyone?