The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
PDF versionBeatification Q&A #1: What's the Rush?
by John L Allen Jr on Apr. 25, 2011
Rome -- Over the course of this week, I’m offering a daily series of questions and answers in the run-up to the beatification of Pope John Paul II on Sunday. Today, we begin with perhaps the single most commonly asked question, both in the media and at the grassroots: What’s the rush? Why is this happening so fast, while other causes sometimes languish for centuries?
(In Italy, by the way, today is Pasquetta, the “little Easter,” a day recalling the meeting between an Angel and the women gathered at Jesus’ tomb. It’s a holiday here, so buona Pasquetta to all!)
The numbers on John Paul’s cause are a matter of record. The beatification comes six years and 29 days after his death on April 2, 2005, making it the fastest beatification in modern times, edging out Mother Teresa by fifteen days. In both cases, the speed was possible because the pope waived the normal five-year waiting period after the candidate’s death in order to launch the process.
Whether that amounts to a “rush,” however, lies in the eye of the beholder.
As Jesuit Fr. James Martin has observed, since there’s a documented miracle, theologically one could say that God approves the pace. Moreover, for the large swath of the population both inside and outside the Catholic church convinced John Paul II was a living saint and that canonization is a formality, the key question may not be why this is happening so fast, but rather why it’s taking so long.
An official study of John Paul’s life which led to a “decree of heroic virtue” in December 2009, authorizing John Paul to be referred to as “venerable,” collected testimony from more than 100 formal witnesses and produced a four-volume report. George Weigel recently wrote that as a result, Catholics have “far more detail into the life and accomplishments of Karol Wojtyła, Pope John Paul II, than the American electorate was offered about the life and accomplishments of Barack Obama, or the British electorate was offered about the lives and accomplishments of David Cameron and Nick Clegg.”
Further, John Paul’s beatification may be the fastest in recent times, but it’s hardly the speediest process on record. That distinction belongs to St. Anthony of Padua, who died in June 1231 and was canonized less than a year later by Pope Gregory IX. Anthony even beat out his master, St. Francis of Assisi, who was canonized 18 months after his death in October 1226 (also by Gregory IX).
NCR: February 17-March 1, 2012
Subscribe to NCR to get all the news and special features that aren't always available online. In this issue:
- Conscience Roundup
Hear what theologians, commentators, and our editors have to say about the contraception mandate
- Special Section: Religious Life
Work of missioners, past and future; African meetings; and more
- Tribute to a Peacemaker
New York's Pax Christi fetes Daniel Berrigan
In truth, those most inclined to question the “rush” often have other reasons for feeling ambivalent about John Paul II – his record on the sexual abuse crisis, for instance, or the more “evangelical” tenor of his papacy, as opposed to the spirit of internal church reform associated with the Second Vatican Council (1962-65).
Just to make the point, it’s hard to imagine many Catholic progressives would be up in arms if, say, Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador had been beatified just six years after his assassination in 1980. Debate over the “how fast” of a sainthood cause, in other words, is almost always bundled with the “who” and the “why.”
That said, for an institution which typically thinks in centuries, six and a half years is nonetheless awfully quick. One can certainly wonder about the pace of the beatification without veering into theological dissent, or calling John Paul’s sanctity into question; news reports from 2008, for instance, suggested that Italian Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the erstwhile Secretary of State under John Paul II, had written to the official in charge of John Paul’s cause to express a preference for waiting while sainthood procedures are underway for other popes, including Pius XII and Paul VI.
There are at least five factors which explain the pace at which things are moving in John Paul’s case.
First, John Paul II himself overhauled the sainthood process in 1983 to make it faster, easier, and cheaper, the idea being to lift up contemporary role models of holiness for a jaded modern world. Though John Paul and Mother Teresa are unique in that they’re the only cases in which the waiting period was waived, they’re just two of more than twenty cases since 1983 in which a candidate reached beatification within thirty years after death – a list that includes a mix of the famous (Padre Pio and Josemaría Escrivá, the founder of Opus Dei) and the relatively obscure (Anuarita Nengapeta, a Congolese martyr, and Chiara Badano, a lay member of Focolare).
In that sense, the pace of John Paul’s beatification is a natural byproduct of his own sainthood policies, which put a premium on demonstrating that sanctity is alive in the here and now.
Second, sainthood is supposed to be a democratic process, beginning with a popular conviction that a given person lived a holy life and is worthy of emulation. In the past a candidate’s fame often spread only gradually, but today the same time lag doesn’t always apply. John Paul II’s papacy skillfully exploited two of the hallmarks of today’s global village: the ubiquity of communications and the relative ease of travel. As a result, one could argue that the pace of his beatification is nothing more than a reflection of the greater speed at which everything moves in the 21st century.
Third, despite John Paul’s reforms, sainthood remains a cumbersome process. Causes which move rapidly typically have an organization behind them able to supply the resources and expertise to make the system work. Opus Dei, for example, could draw upon some of the best canon lawyers in the Catholic church in promoting the cause of its founder, and Focolare has a motivated membership with good Vatican connections behind the cause of Badano. In the case of John Paul II, the infrastructure of the Catholic church in Poland, as well as the diocese of Rome, are solidly behind the cause, ensuring that it doesn’t languish for lack of institutional support.
Fourth, the decision-makers in the church today are largely John Paul II appointees and protégés, which gives them a powerful biographical motive for wanting to see their mentor raised to sainthood during their own lifetimes. That list includes Pope Benedict XVI himself, as well as Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz of Krakow, Poland, the longtime private secretary of John Paul II, for whom keeping the memory of John Paul alive represents a sacred calling. Dziwisz turns 72 on April 27, making the May 1 beatification a perfect birthday gift, and there’s no question that he would like to see the canonization happen before he steps off the stage at the retirement age of 80.
Fifth, there's the simple fact of popular demand. Affection for John Paul II remains palpable around the world, and in many cases people aren't waiting for formal approval to tout him as a saint. The Italian magazine Epoca, for example, splashed the headline "The Pope Saint" across its cover this week, not sweating the difference between beatification and canonization.
Will the same fast pace propel John Paul across the finish line of canonization in record time?
There are several variables involved, not least of which is the need for another documented miracle. Mother Teresa’s case might be instructive: Although pretty much everyone regards her canonization as a foregone conclusion, seven and a half years have passed since her beatification in October 2003, and the organizers of her cause are still looking for a miracle which satisfies the stringent tests of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Causes of Saints.
It’s also possible that calls could mount for caution, especially if new revelations surface about the response to the sexual abuse crisis during John Paul’s papacy. Even if none of that calls into question John Paul’s personal holiness or the towering achievements of his papacy, some might argue for waiting out of sensitivity to the reaction of victims of clerical abuse.
Finally, a striking fact about Benedict XVI’s approach to saint-making is that while he hasn’t slowed the pace of beatifications, he has showed greater patience when it comes to canonizations. John Paul approved 1,338 beatifications over 26 years, an average of 51 a year; Benedict so far has signed off on 789, or 131 a year. Yet Benedict is not canonizing people with the same frenzy. John Paul’s 482 canonizations work out to more than 18 a year, while Benedict’s 34 so far represent an annual average just under seven. That contrast could suggest a somewhat lengthier delay before John Paul II is formally declared a saint.
On the other hand, the four factors listed above to explain the rapid progress of John Paul’s beatification are all still in place, and all apply in pretty much equal measure to the prospects for a quick canonization.
In the end, Martin may have it right. If another miracle comes quickly which survives the usual medical and theological scrutiny, one could say that it’s God who keeps John Paul II on the fast track.
[John L. Allen Jr. is NCR senior correspondent. He can be reached at jallen@ncronline.org.]
Editor's Note: We can send you an e-mail alert every time John Allen's column, "All Things Catholic," is posted to NCRonline.org. Go to this page and follow the directions: E-mail alert sign-up. If you already receive e-mail alerts from us, click on the "update my profile" button to add "All Things Catholic" to your list.
More NCR coverage of the beatification of John Paul II
Maureen Fiedler: Beatifications and Politics
Michael Baxter: Biography of JPII raises questions about partiality
John L. Allen Jr.: In death as in life, John Paul a sign of contradiction
Gerald Slevin John Paul beatification highlights dysfunctional monarchy
John Allen's Beatification Q&As
#1: What's the Rush?
#2: What’s the deal with miracles?
#3: Why make saints out of popes?
#4: What’s the Divine Mercy connection?
The bottom line is that by
The bottom line is that by canonizing him ASAP, his disciples in the Curia will hope that his "sainthood" will make it harder for a future pope to reverse his declarations: 1)That only men can be priests, 2)That the missil must be translated literally from Latin (irregardless as to how crazy it sounds in the other language and whether Christ really did die more "the many" and not for all), and 3)That all abortion is illicit, even to save the life of an unfortunate mother.
As for Romero, he was a martyr for his faith, which makes him a saint, irregardless of what the Vatican does or does not declare.
"regardless" is the correct
"regardless" is the correct form. With a dearth of Polish saints, I conclude that it is a great move.
You do realize that 1) and 3)
You do realize that 1) and 3) are irreversible, and 2) probably (and hopefully) will last forever regardless, right? I think it's much more likely that the bottom line is really that he was an obviously holy man.
Nothing is impossible in the
Nothing is impossible in the eyes of God and the Holy Spirit. Once upon a time, in my lifetime, it was "impossible" to offer the mass in any language but Latin. A motivated Vatican Council with a motivated pope could do all 3 of the above in a heart beat. Probably not for at least several more decades, but you never know. There will come a time when the shortage of priests will force the issue on #1 and the Sensus Fidelium will force the issue on #3, as well as with regards to birth control.
Hear! Hear!
Hear! Hear!
from the bottom
from the bottom up-
irregardless is not a word....
2-abortion is illicit, Christ died for the many , not all, and only men can be priest has more to do with these being statements of fact and little to do with JPII, the Hero of Assisi , he who prays with naturalists.... who kissed the Koran and asked John the Baptist to protect Islam.... who awarded pectoral crosses to Anglican pretenders and Lutheran Females ' Bishops" ......
Sainthood is not a democratic process- it is the church "defining" that someone has led a Heroic life in Their primary calling, in this case, the shepherd of the universal church; he who promoted Cardinal law to archpriest of Mary Major!! who did nothing of Rembert Weakland or Roger Mahony .... and do look further into that miraculous cure of the parkinson afflicted nun- more there than meets the eye - JPII was a popular pope and leader, but the distinction of Saintly against other Saintly Pontiffs seems to me to be a bit stretched- perhaps it has more to do with certain vatican types desiring to cash in on his ' subito santa ' popularity and less to do with reality- but i am not criticising; i am glad i did not have his job- I'm just not convinced he performed ' heroically in the execution' of same...... what of all the faithful who desired the ancient true form of worship, to whom JP II paid lip service George Weigel - did you see George on you tube deny the applicability of Christs' Kingship to United States citizens ?.....
Irregardless is a word. It's
Irregardless is a word. It's the nonstandard form of "regardless". See www.thefreedictionary.com/irregardless
"irregardless is not a word".
"irregardless is not a word". Even though you are correct, it is a petty, slap of no consequence to the message of the post.
"I pray that they may all be
"I pray that they may all be one." UNITY says God. Dis-unity, arguing, fighting, attacking,...are signs of the devil.
Where do the readers of this site fall?
Acceptance of the enabling of
Acceptance of the enabling of pedophiles by our hierarchy, all the way up the ladder to JP the Lesser, is as sure of a sign as any that the devil has infiltrated our Church at its highest levels. We will continue to scream, shout, and pray for an end to the current evil, unaccountable system IRREGARDLESS of whether it disrupts the "unity" that folks like you crave for like a security blanket.
Regardless?
Regardless?
Well, thank you John Allen
Well, thank you John Allen for giving us the detailed Vatican line on this. However, it does not assuage these major concerns:
1) The beatification is super fast. It raises the prospect that canonization will be almost as fast.
2) The favoritism is clear. Pope Benedict wants to honor his predecessor, so the current pope bends the rules for him alone.
3) The speedy beatification is a very effective tool to enshrine John Paul II in “certain holiness” before objective historical judgment can be made of the man in light of any further revealed truth. The information about the notorious Legionnaire-founder Marcial Maciel Delgado, the widespread cover up of priestly sexual abuse, and JPII’s efforts to redefine and redirect the legacy of the Second Vatican Council all point to questions about how close JPII really was to God.
Sure, JPII was praised in his time. He did some good things as pope. However, to try to make it sound like JPII is being beatified by overwhelming popular demand is disingenuous in some respects. The late Pope John XXIII was arguably the most widely loved pope in modern times and thought to have been a saint by the millions of people who were alive when he died. The torturous route to beatify John XXIII (paring him with Pius IX) and the unenthusiastic way the latter Vatican leadership took toward John XXIII is all part of the current political revisionism that JPII himself initiated.
Probably what would be helpful in putting all this sainthood business into context is for John Allen to explain sainthood without the Catholic myth. The church has been successful in making many people believe that its declaration of sainthood is to identify a perfect person of God like Jesus. Actually, that is not, even in Catholic context, what a saint is. A saint is not a perfect person in judgments and actions but human who is some way had a laudable life (at least in the end) that lands him or her in Heaven with God. Catholics believe that saints have intercessory powers for earthlings while in Heaven. There were persons declared saints over time that we probably would have a hard time today recognizing as saints (because our standards have improved a bit.). After all, Joan of Arc wasn’t the first saint that killed people.
Central to the sainthood understanding is an understanding that such declarations are meant to advance the church in some way by creating models for the faithful. In recent years, the process seems bent on advancing the Vatican in some way (virtually all the modern popes are being declared saints!). No non-Catholic is declared a saint by the Catholic Church. That is not to say there are no non-Catholic saints! Other religious groups declare saints for the same vested reason, notably the Orthodox, Episcopals and Buddhists. Interestingly, the Russian Orthodox Church advanced its identify with the post-communist state by declaring Czar Nicholas II a saint. We Westerners laugh at that, but the Vatican gives the Easterners a laugh, too.
Most saints in the Catholic Church are clerics and religious --- those that have worked for the church. They have the organized religious orders to pay the money to advance their cause. Few lay, married people make it to the sainthood because they have no advocate (JPII tried to rectify this a bit during his long reign. He named so many saints that he was even criticized by his own elitist bishops).
The whole question about sainthood is a dated one in a more rational world where educated persons readily admit that it is preposterous to declare in our human way that someone is a saint in Heaven. We’re only guessing after all.
"We’re only guessing after
"We’re only guessing after all."
I'm glad non-Catholics are at least being exposed to theological questions, but I would recommend the National Catholic Register over the Reporter if you really want to know what the Church teaches. At least, I must believe that knowing nothing else about you you are not a Catholic, judging only by your skeptical indifferentism towards the authority of the Church and positing the equality in truths between Orthodox, Episcopals and even Buddhists with the one Church.
Woe to the ape that says Tash and Aslan are one in the same.
Actually, I hold a graduate
Actually, I hold a graduate degree in theology from a conservative Catholic university in addition to other degrees. Even a Catholic can be skeptical about some things. Just read any work of any great Catholic theologian. Too, please be aware that the Catholic Church recognizes the Orthodox Church as a "true" church, and even believes the Episcopals and Buddhists know some truths.
Is there any theological argument that you would like to raise?
None of the things you
None of the things you attribute to Pope John Paul II are his specifically. They are the well established teaching of the Catholic Church and have been for a very long time - and with very good reason. These teachings spring from the faith of the Church. They, like the faith, are a gift of God which the Church has received through the Holy Spirit.
Money makes the world go
Money makes the world go around
The world go around
The world go around
Money makes the world go around
It makes the world go 'round.
A mark, a yen, a buck, or a pound
A buck or a pound
A buck or a pound
Is all that makes the world go around,
That clinking clanking sound
Can make the world go 'round.
"The curia" you refer to is
"The curia" you refer to is not the Roman Curia vilified by Frings, Ratzinger, Lienart and company at Vatican II -- it has been replaced by Vatican II yes-men.
Granted these Vatican II yes-men make not be going as fast or quickly as you would like in dismantling Catholic faith and morals, but Benedict XVI and his Vatican II pope predecessors don't want to go to quickly -- it might raise alarm and halt the process of dissolution.
As far as Latin American liberation theology goes -- Latin American have rejected Vatican II Catholicism and are going Protestant Fundamentalist these days.
Interesting Time magazine article:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,156277,00.html
All part of the "renewal" we have been hearing about for the past 40 years.
Calm down -- Vatican II has not been repealed -- far from it.
The point that so many of the
The point that so many of the curia were appointed by John Paul and closely associated with him, would certainly explain the speeded up process, but one wonders if this is not something of a conflict of interest. The issue of impartiality is one that also has some importance. John Paul may well deserve to be a saint, but would it not be better to have him canonized by a Pope who does not owe the success of his career to John Paul?
Also, the issue of the founders of religious orders getting fast tracked to sainthood due to the money and attention provided by their order seems somewhat unfair. There are a great many holy laymen who led lives of great heroism and who will never be canonized since they don't have a religious order pushing the issue.
I wonder if these tendencies to politicize sainthood somehow cheapens it? Perhaps the long range view of centuries may be preferable to the fast track?
I know some people (relatives
I know some people (relatives and friends) who are saints. They are "common" people and will never be on any list of saints on earth.
The process described here seems more related to the way politics works.
Absolutely, anonymous, you
Absolutely, anonymous, you are so very right!
Really real saints remain unknown. Too meek . . .
Why the rush? So the guys who owe wojo including ratzo git her done before the whole darn thing collapses under the weight of their own corruption and amputation of our Holy Mother Church whom they pimp shamelessly, including in this miserably shameless process.
Hey, why the Rush?
same reason as with that fascist Escriva
the perspective of time would not permit any canonization
and this particular institutional form's days are numbered, in any case, whatever they may say now, a result of their own destruction of our great theologians and saints in the eighties.
This false canonization only hastens the process.
Even my fine and solidarious bishop here in the Ciudad Juarez diocese mentions only the speed with which it occurs.
This is so true. There are
This is so true. There are saints doing the work of Jesus everyday, only observed by those who appreciate the love shown them.
It is the Catholic Church's
It is the Catholic Church's equivalent to the Russian Orthodist Church's naming Czar Nicholas II as a saint.
What will the victims of the
What will the victims of the abuses of father Maciel (protected by Jhon Paul, until Benedict came into power) of its sainthood?.
This sort of things make you loose faith in the catholic chyurch....
The People of God have
The People of God have already declared Pope John Paul II to be a saint. During his funeral Mass, there were several instances of the congregation chanting "santo subito!", "make him a saint now!"; during the early days of the Church, that was all that would be necessary to declare a person to be a saint. If, as John Allen says, the process of canonization is supposed to be a democratic process, the Curia and the Holy See responding to the sensus fidelium, the general sense of the Church's faithful, then Pope John Paul II's beatification is a supreme example of the way in which this process is supposed to work.
I recognize that there is a small minority of people who think that he was too "conservative", or too authoritarian, or not authoritarian enough. I recognize as well that in certain areas his record is not entirely perfect (the sexual abuse issue, the appointment of some really sub-par bishops and his refusal to discipline disobedient bishops like Archbishops Hunthausen and Weakland, etc). Some people oppose his cause due to his refusal to endorse their own pet beliefs and opinions, whether that be the group who wants to ordain women as priestesses, or the group that wants to entirely repudiate what they believe to be the biggest error in Church history: Vatican II. These folks will never be satisfied. At the same time, it should be noted that the rest of the record of Pope John Paul II's papacy is beyond impressive and his legacy to the Church in the form of his body of teaching is possibly the most substantial of any Pope in the last few centuries.
The sensus fidelium is that Pope John Paul II is a saint; the vast majority of Catholics across the globe believe this to be the case. In beatifying him on Sunday, May 1, Holy Mother Church will be responding to the belief of her people and to the will of God Himself, Who clearly has already placed His own stamp of approval on the cause, since God Himself saw fit to grant a miracle in response to Pope John Paul II's intercession.
Let us be open to the graces that will come as result of this beatification and let us give thanks to God that one of our time is to be raised to the honors of the Altar. When we celebrate his yearly memorial, what a profound blessing it will be to recall the times we saw him in person, or heard his voice. (Soon to be Blessed) John Paul II will not be some abstract person who lived centuries ago, but a man of our time, who knew our struggles and who was an example to us all of our lives.
If there is a god he would
If there is a god he would never class jp11 as a christian, For one reason you dont help cover up crimes against children
Sensus fidelium is not a
Sensus fidelium is not a majority rule thing. Serious questions have yet to be answered about some of JPII's positions which allowed sexual abusers & their supporters (Bernard Law, Marciel two name just two)to not only be sheltered by the church but to thrive! He took money from Marciel which was generated by crimiinal means. Do we really want people to continue in those particular footsteps? Not entirely perfect reg sexual abuse is the biggest understatement I've ever seen Record my Sens.fid. vote for a flat out no.
Please, the sense of the
Please, the sense of the faithful is not determined by a group of people in a crowd yelling santo subito. As far as JPII^ papacy being beyond impressive,I agree. HE is the only Pope thay I know of that tried to UNDO a ecumenical council of the church. The gaul to do such treachury is indeed impressive
CWG, you describe what SOME
CWG, you describe what SOME of the People of God did (petitioning for Subito santo!) but merely by reading these posts, it's obvious that not all of the People of God believe that John Paul II deserves canonization.
John Allen's distinction between John Paul's 'personal holiness' and his actions as pope isn't valid. It was precisely in his vocation as the Bishop of Rome that he did or did not cooperate with God's grace, just as each of us does in our own vocation - that is, in our daily relationships, work, prayer and participation in a faith community.
The posts on this website do
The posts on this website do not reflect the opinions and beliefs of the majority of Catholics globally. Even if the opinions voices on this site represented 100% of the Catholics in the United States (which they do not), then that would represent only about 7% of the entire global Church. Sometimes the Church in the US forgets that is does not speak for the entire Church, but only for a tiny minority. Thus, while opinions such as those posted by many on this site are important and certainly worthy of consideration, it should not be forgotten that they are far from even a convincing minority view.
Secondly, it is not a requirement for canonization that one be perfect or without flaws. A wise person once said that a saint is an ordinary person doing ordinary things, with extraordinary love. If that is a valid definition of a saint, then Pope John Paul II definitely lives up to that definition.
I have to agree, that
I have to agree, that ordinary people who live extraordinary lives doing good are Saints, and do not make the list. Also, it is politics. What about John XXIII; he opened the windows on Vatican II? He was a very saintly and holy man.
For over a thousand years it
For over a thousand years it was very cheap to live as a Saint and to be recognized as one. Since the 12th century, however, public veneration wihtout the permission of the Holy See has been unlawful. Furthermore veneration and above all canonization is an exceedingly costly process. This is perhaps the main reason why such a large proportion of venerations and canonizations are of priests and religious whose cause is supported by the resources of a diocese, a nation, or religious order.
The fact that JPII did so
The fact that JPII did so much damage to the church renders this whole process meaningless. It's a sham, pure and simple. Read Maureen Dowd's column in the NY Times for Sunday, April 24.
The whole canonization
The whole canonization process is anachronistic. It needs to be completely revised and updated.
Pax. Aristophilos
The whole canonization
The whole canonization process is anachronistic. It needs to be completely revised and updated.
Pax. Aristophilos
As far as I am concerned it
As far as I am concerned it is a slap in the face to those victims of abuse of the clergy, and another way of "sweeping under the mat" the atrocities of the Catholic Church. What a time to pick to beatify anyone!! We hear nothing about the holiness of Pope John 23 who was on a positive path for change, but of course, they, meaning the curia, would never acknowledge that. The whole church just keeps getting messier, and it will only take a miracle to change it. We are so far away from the model that Jesus portrayed, it is going to take another prophet to bring us back.
It is sad that the "Santo
It is sad that the "Santo subito" crowd has not risen in anger and demanded the end of the protection for pedophile priests. Instead they cry for sainthood of the pope that protected pedophile priests in spite of his vow to protect the flock. It is dark times for the church indeed.
I think JPII gets a bad rap
I think JPII gets a bad rap re: pedophile priests. He was the one who actually put a stop to the carnage by instituting reforms in the late 1980s which helped put a stop to it.
What's so insidious however, is that the victims of the class of 1986 could still be out there. It takes years before a victim will come forward - maybe 30 years? So, if the problem is resolved in 1987, a victim may not come forward until 2017? We may have many more years of unsavory newspaper headlines.
IT IS AN OUTRIGHT bit of bull
IT IS AN OUTRIGHT bit of bull that JPII put a stop to priest abuse in the late 1980s.
If John Paul, for example, had acted on seminarians' allegations against Legion of Christ founder Maciel Marcel that Father Juan Vaca detailed to the pope in a 1989 letter, Maciel's career would have been derailed, cutting his access to Legion funds and perhaps stopping his sexual abuse of his own sons as well as others. Marcel, of course, was a darling of JPII.
There have been priest abuses throughout the later decades of JPII's life. Nothing that JPII did stopped them.
An element in the
An element in the beatification and canonization process not mentioned here is money. It takes a lot of money to get someone canonized. I asked a Sister of Notre Dame de Namur if her congregation is doing anything about getting their member, Sister Dorothy Stang, who was martyred defending the Brazilian rainforest, canonized, and the sister said it was far too expensive. It seems that the supporters of the beatification of John Paul II struggle with no such limitation.
If John Paul II had not
If John Paul II had not abolished the office of Devil's Advocate, would Escriva have been canonized? (Is he the only "saint" who purchased a title of nobility?)
If there were still a Devil's Advocate, would John Paul II be beatified?
How long before Maciel is beatified? How many of his relatives are "saints"?
Since we are required to venerate those who the pope claims (infallibly) are saints, if we don't, are we excommunicated?
When teaching 6th graders
When teaching 6th graders about saints, I often referred to "big s's" (saints canonized by the Church) and "little s's" (people we call saints who are not canonized). The process of the church for official canonization takes money, persistence, and people who are free to campaign for their candidate! I find much support from knowing about and knowing personally "little s's" - if the church continues with protocol, I find no edification despite the number of "miracles" attributed to the soon-to-be saint.
This has been said everywhere
This has been said everywhere and over and over: John Paul did not help the untold numbers of abused children. Wouldn't a true saint risk his own reputation and even that of the Church to protect those children? This is a very important point and deserves more than a small paragraph in your essay. The world is thinking what I am writing here.
Do the "people of the God"
Do the "people of the God" really care about another priest/pope becoming a saint? I agree with the above comment that there are many saints among us that the church will never know or recognize this side of heaven. Living a life in the "world" and doing it with faith and charity is a miracle all on its own. A miracle, that many of the priests/bishops/cardinals in power right now diminish, by the exclusion of the "people of God" from any position of authority.
Sadly our church is being
Sadly our church is being reduced to a circus for the masses. On the one hand we have the hoopla of beatification with beautiful vestments and noble claims about the man or woman; and then the sanctification--the beatification spectacle doubled or tripled. But the dark side of this future saint is ignored by this clerical merry-go-round. But the thousands affected by the rigid doctrinaire sexual theology remain as his chief theological achievement. His Polish Jansenism is now the official sexual theology of our church--forced down our throats by the fear of damnation.
'Polish Jansenism'? Would you
'Polish Jansenism'? Would you csre to tell me where, before the Californication of the 1960s, the Church ever taught anything different?
Or is anything from before 1968, including the Scriptures, to be thrown in the bin?
John Allen is about the only
John Allen is about the only writer for NCR that is not filled with vitriol towards the Vatican. Yes, the question may be raised, "Why so fast?" and I think Mr. Allen let's us see differing opinions. Good job.
I am a Catholic progressive
I am a Catholic progressive as well as an historian, and I do not think the process of sainthood should be so fast for anyone. It is not as if we have a lack of saint. What I want to know is who was (is) the Devil's Advocate and what is this man (I am betting no woman would get this post.) doing? Is he doing his job or has he, too, been co-opted by the cult of personality of JP II?
As to JPII's so-called towering achievements, I do not see one achievement. I do see plenty of steps backward. He is the worst pope in my lifetime which includes the questionable Pius XII. I do see a small minded man with a huge ego who was able to close his eyes to things he should have dealt with but so long as his palm was greased for his previous Poland, he could ignore "men" like Marciel and others who should have been punished like Cardinal Law(less). By his inaction he assured that even more children would suffer.
My own parents are more saints than JPII will ever be!
Why do we have to make
Why do we have to make celebrities of people? We have Jesus, and we do not need anyone else. If Karol Wotyla is in heaven, that is fine. If he is not, no amount of bells and incense are going to make any difference at all. And, at the bottom line, what does it matter anyway? Peter Downie, Australia.
I question the rightness of
I question the rightness of spending so much energy, money, and time on the canonization process. What for?? There's a world of hurt out there!! Think of the starving, suffering people who would benefit from that energy, money, and time if it were spent on them! This is another one of those "What would Jesus do?" issues. When will the Catholic Church commit the resources it wastes on canonization and other political efforts to do what Christ commanded:"Love one another as I have loved you."??
Re: "...the decision-makers
Re: "...the decision-makers in the church today are largely John Paul II appointees and protégés, which gives them a powerful biographical motive for wanting to see their mentor raised to sainthood during their own lifetimes. That list includes Pope Benedict XVI himself, as well as Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz of Krakow, Poland, the longtime private secretary of John Paul II, for whom keeping the memory of John Paul alive represents a sacred calling."
Since the collegiality and subsidiarity promised by Vatican II have all but disappeared, absolute power rests in the Vatican. We all know that absolute power corrupts absolutely. The rush to sainthood may be to ensure that it happens before we find out that JPII was involved in the abuse crisis in some way.
No one who was in the hierarchy of the church during the abuse crisis should be delared a saint, but we know it will happen because of the absolute corruption in the church.
The above comments reflect my
The above comments reflect my views better than I could express them. Old boys club politics in action with this beatification process.
How to protest effectively? Don't they even have a neutral Devil's Advocate any more?
The post of DA no longer
The post of DA no longer exists, so, no.
In my opinion, it is truly an
In my opinion, it is truly an error to equate the death of (Saint) Oscar Romero with that of Bl. John Paul II. One gave his life for and in defense of his faith and for the welfare of those for whom he was the Shepherd. He died a violent death, not unlike that suffered by the Apostles and early martyrs.
I have no objection to the continuing cause of Bl John Paul II; however, I do believe that we need more time to objectively evaluate the life, works, and papacy of JPII, not a sanitized version from those who owe him allegiance because of friendship, justification, bureaucratic appointment.
And let history ever record
And let history ever record how pope john paul ii dissed Abp. Oscar Romero, just a short while before the latter's martyrdom.
Politics, personal
Politics, personal aggrandizement and false pride among John Paul II sycophants. O,Lord, what has happened to your Church?
"...since there’s a
"...since there’s a documented miracle, theologically one could say that God approves the pace." "Theologically," John? Theology has nothing to do with it. This is pure politics. If you insist, however, in blaming God for this disaster, I guess you would be putting the beatification in the right category -- an act of God, as our insurance companies like to describe other natural disasters, tornados, hurricanes, earthquakes, and tsunamis for which they bear no responsibility. Trouble is, Benedict IS responsible for this patently self-serving move, casting as "a blessed" a man who may be the worst pope of modern times.
How can any even think of
How can any even think of making him a saint, When he protected some one who raped his own children, And never said one word about a cardinal who praised a bishop for not reporting a child raping preist to the police, Then you have this he along with many of the hierarchy and others in the church have booked their selves places in hell, Matthew 18 springs to mind
I am probably odd person out,
I am probably odd person out, but I have not been an admirer or supporter of John Paul II! I don't doubt that he is or may have been a holy person and perhaps he should be canonized, but I have my druthers. Why not John XXIII? For me, this man is a saint whether they ever canonize him or not. He helped save our world from nuclear war and total devastation as well as opening a window of the church to let in fresh air, so to speak. Two viable miracles in my humble estimation. I praise and thank God for him and pray to him for his intercession in our dysfunctional church today.
These comments, focused on
These comments, focused on proving one side of the JPII beatification issue, clearly portray the papacy and curia as a political rather than a religious and moral organ.
Perhaps that is why so many members of the Church are disheartened by the Church. The RCC has become a tool of politics rather than a tool of honoring God thru truth.
Most go to Church to know Jesus and his directives better.
If we need politics, we have plenty to deal with at home.
May I respectfully suggest that this beatification of the popular JP!! is put up now as a distraction from addressing the root causes of the clerical and sex abuse behaviors in the RCC, including the silence of the laity.
Why beatify J2P2 so quickly?
Why beatify J2P2 so quickly? Remember that this man protected the priestly child rapists for all those years - maybe child molesters need a patron saint?
God approves the pace!!!!
God approves the pace!!!! Give me a break. Talk about theological nonsense.
I am sure God has no opinion on the matter and couldn't care less.
Now, what I am sure God would approve is that we stop this nonsense of "canonizing" people..... and give the millions of dollars spend on pomp and circumstance to the poor. The canonization process is a scandal in an already scandal ridden church.
God approves the pace!!!!!!!!! How can any rational person write or beleive a statement like that. No wonder people are leavving the church ( and coming back to Jesus) in droves. With people like Allen and a Jesuit priest mouthing such nonsense, the only rational action is to get out of this sinking ship!
I will never consider someone
I will never consider someone who hides pedophiles as a "saint".
I will never consider someone who worked so hard to take the church back to the dark ages.
I will never consider JPII as a "saint"...only as a great communicator (of things backwards).
Nor will I !!!
Nor will I !!!
It seems to me that the way
It seems to me that the way that former youth minister John Paul II responded to the abuse of children by the clergy directly reflects on his personal holiness.
Rush or no rush, this man
Rush or no rush, this man should not be beatified or sainted. He was no saint, and for the Church to honor him in this way is truly outrageous.
This is the man who said we are not allowed to even talk about ordination of women. This is the man who allowed his paranoia about communism lead him to try to kill liberation theology in the Americas. This is the man who harbored Fr. Maciel -- to say he "dragged his feet" on addressing the clergy sexual abuse problem is the understatement of the century.
I am horrified that the Church is moving to beatify this man.
I can remember when certain
I can remember when certain theologians argued that the Church exercised infallibility in canonising. I was somewhat sceptical then. Now with the speed, spread and politicisation of sainthood I am more sceptical than ever.
I would hope that John Allen
I would hope that John Allen will address the "dubious" miracle which is used to propel the beatification process of JP2. When miracles are attested by experts favorable to the cause, and contrary expert testimony is rejected, the miracle verification process is exposed for what it is - a charade. As with Escriva - miracles approved by Opus Dei physicians lack the credibility of modern science - but they still achieved their designated purpose - which is to prop up a system that is corrupt and phony.
When the focus is on the person of John Paul II, the real purpose of the beatification is obscured. Of course there are the forces within the Vatican and throughout the church leadership that has a personal debt owing to this pope who favored them with prestige and power, but the political and theological purpose of the beatification is to ideologically back up the process begun by John Paul II known as the "restoration" - a cute word meaning to roll back Vatican II to an ecclesiology closer to Pius X rather than John XXIII. This in turn justifies the theological direction that Benedict XVI wishes to take the church.
The book by David Gallop: The
The book by David Gallop: The Power and the Glory, Inside the Dark Heart of John Paul II's Vatican, New York 2007,describes JP II's less than saintly behavior during his life. An eye opening book for many people.
David YALLOP is the name of
David YALLOP is the name of the author in question.
Perhaps it time to dismantle
Perhaps it time to dismantle the 'saint making machinery'. First, we are treading into a realm for which we have no business. Who's to say we have the vaguest notion about the post mortem life of anyone. I have heard the biggest scoundrel eulogized and canonized at funerals. Second, though we have a healthy concept of the communion of saints, in reality, most of it is still steeped in superstition and magic, and diminishes our faith rather than promotes it. Third, it is a form of ecclesial elitism that is often times more a function of money and persistence, to the exclusion of many worthy, simple folks. It is an outdated spect of our faith, and it is time to leave the medieval worldviews behind.
Post new comment