Unbelievable.
Not necessary for belief... not infallible ... calling into question the legitimacy of the Papacy of Pope Francis again? Outright rejection of Vatican II? All of it underlies the reasoning behind 1P5's latest article, "Why we need not (and should not) call Paul VI saint." Even Janet Smith linked to the article by Kwazniewski.
This has been going on for years, outright rejection of recent canonizations - unheard of in the Church when I was growing up. Now days those of us who do believe and accept - with joy - those whose heroic virtues are recognized and 'canonized' by the Pope are dismissed as ultramontanists and papalotars.
Unbelievable.
Most theologians and faithful Catholics certainly believe canonizations are legitimate. Those very people who condemn Vatican II are doing in their own way what some of the post-conciliar 'reformers' did when updating the liturgical calendars, removing saints and their feast days and so on. They are acting in the same protestant spirit of those who removed saints statues and altars from renovated churches, and downplayed devotion and prayers to the saints.
Believable.
Tomorrow a great company of witnesses will be declared saints - canonized. By the reigning Pontiff, Pope Francis.
Believe it or not.
The exercise of infallibility comes only when the pope himself proclaims a person a saint. The proclamation is made in a Latin formula of which we offer an approximate translation:
"In honor of the Holy Trinity, for the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the increase of the Christian life, with the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul and of Our Own, after long reflection, having invoked divine assistance many times and listened to the opinion of many of our Brothers in the Episcopate, We declare and define as Saint Blessed N. and inscribe his/her name in the list of the saints and establish that throughout the Church they be devoutly honored among the saints."[...]
The 1967 New Catholic Encyclopedia discusses the theological foundation for the infallibility of canonization: "The dogma that saints are to be venerated and invoked as set forth in the profession of faith of Trent (cf. Denz. 1867) has as its correlative the power to canonize. ... St. Thomas Aquinas says, 'Honor we show the saints is a certain profession of faith by which we believe in their glory, and it is to be piously believed that even in this the judgment of the Church is not able to err' (Quodl. 9:8:16).
"The pope cannot by solemn definition induce errors concerning faith and morals into the teaching of the universal Church. Should the Church hold up for universal veneration a man's life and habits that in reality led to [his] damnation, it would lead the faithful into error. It is now theologically certain that the solemn canonization of a saint is an infallible and irrevocable decision of the supreme pontiff. God speaks infallibly through his Church as it demonstrates and exemplifies its universal teaching in a particular person or judges that person's acts to be in accord with its teaching."
At the same time, it is important to note that while the decree of heroic virtues and the miracle form a necessary part of the process of canonization, they are not the specific object of the declaration of infallibility. - Source
Front row: Archbishop Óscar Romero, Sister Nazaria Ignacia de Santa Teresa de Jesús March Mesa and Father Vincenzo Romano; second row: Father Francesco Spinelli, Nunzio Sulprizio and Sister Maria Katharina Kasper (Photo illustration by Melissa Hartog/National Catholic Register; public domain)
"The scribes and pharisees online and at 1P5 are claiming that B. Paul VI should not and will not be a saint tomorrow"
ReplyDeleteReally? By whose authority?
By whose authority - exactly.
DeleteWould you list the names of those pictured?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2018-10/pope-francis-canonization-mass-paul-vi-romero.html
DeleteI hope this link works. It provides a brief comment on the other five "unknown."
Hi Angela!
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.lastampa.it/2018/10/14/vaticaninsider/the-pope-declares-saints-montini-and-romero-let-us-leave-behind-wealth-and-power-JDuHQtGRBws0OHAOPrYscI/amphtml/pagina.amp.html&ved=2ahUKEwiol7r3robeAhVLn-AKHawlAj8QFjAAegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw1LKlEuI6av1aqxKorcM_RM&cf=1
DeleteLong link but good article. :)
Hi Yaya! :) Sending hugs!
DeleteIf the Pope can change the Mass then he can make a Saint....
ReplyDeleteAs a theologian, I agree that it is not an infallible teaching of the church that canonizations are infallible. It is possible (and in the case of Paul VI, likely) that a person who is canonized should not have been canonized. The article by Dr. Peter Kwasniewski is well researched and provides ample evidence of this thesis. I don't know why people dismiss him out of hand without actually taking up the arguments and proving why he is wrong. That sort of thing reeks of emotionalism instead of rationality.
ReplyDeleteI did not know you are a theologian. Thanks for reading and commenting.
DeleteAB - you are challenged in your statements by other theologians:
Delete“St. Thomas says that in some degree, when we confess a certain member of the Church to be among the blessed, this belief is an extension of the confession of faith (Quodl. 9,16). If we can say in the Creed that we believe in the "communion of saints", it necessarily follows that the Church must maintain some means for distinguishing who is among the saints that we believe in and confess. This is why the canonization of saints is bound up with the Church's infallibility; or, as Dr. Ott says, "If the Church could err in her opinion [of canonized saints], consequences would arise which would be incompatible with the sanctity of the Church" (ibid).
Remember, the canonzation of a saint means two things: that the person is among the blessed in heaven and that they possess virtues that are worthy of imitation; i.e., they are a role model. Can you imagine the mess that would arise if, through errant canonizations, Catholics were led to admire and imitate persons who were among the damned? It is because of the confusion that would arise in the public worship of the Church, as well as the devotional lives of private Catholics, that canonizations of saints are considered a particular subset of the general infallibility of the Roman Pontiff. This comes to bear especially as we move to the second part of the argument: that canonizations must be infallible because of the sacrifice of the Mass as an intrinsically acceptable offering to God.”
http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/theology/81-theology/74-infallability-of-canonizations.html
Did you even read the article by Peter Kwasniewski? Also, please show me where the church infallably teaches that canonizations are infallable?
DeleteYou do not answer the statements above. If we cannot trust canonizations, then it is possible that we are praying to condemned people. We include these condemned people in our Masses and even celebrate feast days for them. How do we trust anything the Church says?
DeleteYour position seems to indicate that you can make up your own rules about what you believe and don’t believe. You either accept Church authority on matters of faith or you are not a Catholic. You are a Protestant.
One further comment. The purpose of canonizations is not only to declare that they are in heaven, but ALSO, and in my opinion even more important, that they practiced HEROIC virtue and are to be imitated. Given all the damage done to the Church by Paul VI, it is imprudent to hold him up as an example of heroic virtue. He is, at best, an example of average or below average virtue and poor leadership abilities. Granted, he did a great thing in promulgating Humane Vitae, but one good encyclical does not a saint make.
ReplyDeleteWhat are your credentials as a theologian?
DeleteI have a bachelors degree in philosophy, two Masters degrees in theology, and am currently finishing my thesis for an STL (the coursework is finished). I have studied theology formally for 10 years. What are your credentials as a theologian?
DeleteI am not claiming to be a theologian. I am a Catholic who accepts the authority of the Magesterium. I believe Matthew 18:18. What the Pope binds on earth is bound in heaven. You obviously do not believe this.
DeleteI'm with you Mary.
DeleteAl, why would you waste your time with me considering your credentials?
Deletesounds more like a Pharisee than an authentic Catholic Theologian to me.
DeleteTerry, I shared my credentials because I was asked about them. I ususally don't flaunt them or bring them up because, frankly, I could care less. I'm not impressed with initials after my name. Catholic In Brooklyn, I hold to what the Church teaches regarding Papal infallability - as defined in the documents of the First Vatican Council. If you had read the article by Dr. Peter K, as well as the series of articles found on Rorate Caeli, you would have found out exactly why canonizations do not fall under the definition of Papal Infallability. To sum up the argument (but your shoudl read the articles yourself, for they are very well researched), the Church has never infallably defined that canonizations are infallable. It has come close, but never taken the plunge. So, until the Church infallably defines that canonizations are infallable, someone can disagree with a particular canonization and still be within the spectrum of Catholic teaching. When it comes to Paul VI, I choose to believe that the canonization was imprudent given the fact that the Congregation for Saints has not even examined all the files on/by Paul VI found in the vatican archives. Given that fact, it is obvious that the investigation was incomplete. I also think it imprudent because the miracles used for his beatification/canonization can be explained by things other than a miracle. The miracles do not even come close to the criteria laid out by the Church. For more information, including proof of these claims, take a look at the above mentioned articles. There are MANY reasons to doubt the canonization of Paul VI. That doesn't mean he's NOT in heaven...it just means that I don't believe he has met the criterion for canonization.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt is hard to know what the reasons are to promote sainthood for Paul VI. He was not particularly inspiring. Yet, we believe many are in heaven who are unknown to us. It does not bother me, like it does some, but I wonder what the purpose is? He is not the villain some cast him as. I guess we can ask for his prayers and see what happens!
ReplyDeleteI like what Bishop Robert Barron has to say about St. Paul Vl. Here's the interview:
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIKSsNZGUg8
oh and one last thing.....
ReplyDeleteThe Pope can change the Mass and the Pope can make a Saint...but the Pope CANNOT make a King!
LOL!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteTerry,
DeleteYou have been nothing but gracious and patient with all of us here who visit your blog. I remember some here who are much better educated than I can ever hope to be call our Holy Father "Frank" or refer to him as "Bergoglio" in a very disrespectful way. I remember the beloved Bishop Robert Barron being referred to as "Bobby Heretic Barron."
Credibility is lost when folks engage in this type of name calling so yeah, it swings both ways ...