Beatification Q&A #3: Why make saints out of popes?

ROME -- Here’s a true story, drawn from the only-in-Rome files.

I was sitting at a restaurant with a friend Monday night when the hostess came by to chat. She mentioned the bad weather (it’s been raining off and on), but went on to say that as a believing Catholic, she finds a bit of gloom appropriate for Good Friday and Holy Saturday, a reminder of Christ’s suffering and death. When she learned I’m a journalist covering the beatification of John Paul II, she became animated in talking about how much the late pope had meant to her as a Roman.

As I described some of the major events this week, she said she’s not quite clear on one point: “When exactly,” she asked, “are they making him a saint?”

I replied that technically they’re not, because this is a beatification rather than a canonization. The hostess was stunned, then stepped away to pick up a copy of an Italian magazine called Epoca, the banner cover of which this week reads: “The Pope Saint.” (For the record, I have a piece in that issue.)

“But they must be making him a saint,” she insisted. “Everybody says so!”

Her reaction illustrates one of at least four reasons why some experts on sainthood over the years have suggested caution, if not an outright moratorium, on the whole idea of naming popes as saints. Those reasons are:

  • It blurs the distinction between beatification and canonization
  • It’s unnecessary, since popes don’t need to be canonized to serve as role models
  • It risks cheapening sainthood by becoming an entitlement of office
  • It also runs the risk of seeming political – a means of canonizing not just the pope, but his policies

The argument usually unfolds like this.

First of all, beatification and canonization do not “make” someone a saint. Theologically, the belief is that the person is already in Heaven. A formal declaration isn’t so much for the saint herself or himself, but for the rest of us. It lifts the person up as a role model of holiness, and makes them available to the whole church as an intercessor.

With popes, however, their election already made them a role model. Popes today are global media celebrities, and they exercise vast influence on the church during their lifetime. John Paul II was certainly proof of the point: It didn’t take a beatification for him to inspire an entire “John Paul II generation” of young laity, priests and bishops, animated by his robust missionary spirit.

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

Subscribe now!

Hence, there’s arguably less urgency about beatifying and canonizing popes than for lesser known figures, whose elevation might have more impact in commending their example to the rest of us.

Second, beatification has traditionally been understood as an intermediate step before formal sainthood, allowing veneration of a candidate in the place where she or he lived. Put simply, beatification is for the local church, while canonization is for the universal church.

With popes, however, that distinction breaks down. Because they were the bishop of Rome, the local church is Rome itself. The beatification ceremony is generally held in Rome, presided over by the pope, and under those circumstances it’s awfully tough to see it as a merely “local” event. Moreover, popes are well known figures whose beatifications attract wide media interest. Does anyone seriously believe that John Paul’s beatification on Sunday will be a story only in Poland and in Rome?

Most people, like my hostess in Rome, will understand Sunday’s event to mean that John Paul II is now a saint. When the canonization does eventually happen, they’ll probably be surprised, wondering why we’re doing it all over again.

Finally, when it comes to sainthood for popes, there’s a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t dilemma. Do you declare them all saints, or do you pick and choose?

Early on, it seemed the church had opted for the former. The first 35 popes traditionally recognized by the church are all considered saints; it’s not until Pope Liberius in the fourth century that we find the first non-saint pontiff, and he’s an outlier. (Liberius, by the way, is considered a saint in Eastern Christianity, with the feast day of August 27.) It’s not until the sixth century that canonization of popes is no longer a foregone conclusion.

The difficulty with that, of course, is that sainthood comes to seem almost pro-forma, arguably reducing the value of any given canonization – virtually making it seem a perk, part of a standard papal benefits package.

Eventually, the solution was picking and choosing. All told, 78 of the 265 popes on the Vatican’s official list have been canonized, with only two in the last 500 years: St. Pius V, 1566-1572, and St. Pius X, 1903-1914. An additional ten popes are currently designated as “Blessed,” awaiting canonization, a list that includes Pope John XXIII, who called the Second Vatican Council (1962-65).

The problem with picking and choosing is the perception of politics. Why, for instance, was the anti-modernist Pius X canonized but not the pastoral, peace-making Benedict XV? (There may well be good reasons, including the fact that Pius X during his own lifetime and at the time of his canonization was better known as the “Pope of the Eucharist,” having promoted frequent reception of the sacrament and expanded it to children, than for his crackdown on theological dissent. Inevitably, however, many people see a political agenda at work).

Today, some Catholic liberals grumble that John Paul is being beatified ahead of Paul VI, who guided the implementation of Vatican II reforms, and before the canonization of John XXIII. Some conservatives, meanwhile, wonder why John Paul II has leapfrogged ahead of Pius XII, the pope during the Second World War, whom they believe deserves to be acquitted from charges that he didn’t do enough to resist the Holocaust.

Vatican officials and other commentators can insist until they’re blue in the face that beatification and canonization of a pope is not the same thing as ratification of all their policies, but many people still won’t buy it. This week, a broad swath of opinion inside and outside the church will draw the conclusion that the “rush” to declare John Paul II a saint is related to a desire to nail down his political legacy.

For those reasons, some observers believe it would be better either not to beatify and canonize popes at all, or at least to wait for a long time after their deaths – perhaps a century or more, so that the political passions they stirred during their lifetimes can dissipate.

The case for declaring popes as saints is easier to state.

First, there’s a matter of justice. If a pope truly lived a life of heroic virtue, and if miracles have occurred in his name, why shouldn’t he have the same right to be recognized as anyone else?

Second, the papacy is a bone-crushing job. A pope in the 21st century is expected to be a living saint, a voice of conscience, a global political titan, a media icon, a leader in ecumenical and inter-religious relations, and the CEO of a complex multinational organization. Moreover, the papacy is basically a death sentence. Technically a pope could resign, but traditionally they carry the burden of office from the moment of election until they die; not for nothing did Benedict XVI compare his election in 2005 to the guillotine. In that sense, bestowing sainthood is one of the few ways the church has of honoring the extraordinary commitment the papacy involves.

Third, the celebrity status of a pope could be seen as another argument for canonizing them. Unlike many sainthood causes which don’t attract widespread interest, a pope’s beatification or canonization is a big deal, which makes it a “teaching moment” about sainthood and the possibility of living a holy life. In an era in which the Catholic church often finds itself in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons, such opportunities to project a positive message are valuable.

Whatever one thinks about this debate, it doesn’t seem the Vatican is inclined to stop bestowing halos on pontiffs anytime soon. After May 1, the countdown will begin for John Paul II’s canonization. In the meantime, sainthood causes are still open for four of his 20th century predecessors: Venerable Pius XII, Blessed John XXIII, and the Servants of God Paul VI and John Paul I.

[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?

Mr Allen must be a comedian.

Mr Allen must be a comedian. He writes about these fairy tales of miracles and saints with an apparent straight face.

Must be a great job being paid to report on a place akin to Disneyland.

Meanwhile the rest of the world gets on with the daily grind of life.

John Paul II is generally

John Paul II is generally credited with helping to bring down the iron curtain. That sounds like the daily grind of life to a lot of people.

A few persons seem intent on

A few persons seem intent on personalizing the fall of European communism by crediting John Paul II or Ronald Reagan. They helped bring some pressures but historians will say objectively that communism in Europe fell of its own weight of ineptitude. After communism, of course, the world got some new democracies and dictatorships.

Just wait 50-75 years before

Just wait 50-75 years before making a pope "Blessed" or "Saint". Let time sort the facts. Information still can be gathered. With data storage today there is more information than ever. The personal agendas of curia officials would not be there. There would be no rush to act.

With JPII there are some questions that still need to be asked and the answers probably are hidden in the Vatican secret files. A dispassionate viewing of any thing now hidden is needed.

Instead of JPII, Christian de

Instead of JPII, Christian de Cherge should be declared blessed. He died in 1993 because of his radical belief in peace and service to people. Now that is someone who is heroic and was killed because of it.

Dearly Beloved. Who cares?

Dearly Beloved.

Who cares? Let's ignore them and maybe they will all go away.

You mean the way the world is

You mean the way the world is ignoring fred moleck?

Here's one of the last

Here's one of the last entries from Yves Congar's diary which he kept during Vatican II. It's from 18 November 1965, the day Dei verbum was promulgated:

I did not go (and,... in any case, would not have gone) to the public sessions at which the De apostolatu laicorum and the De divina revelatione were to be proclaimed, the last being a great document that provides theology with the means of becoming fully evangelical. The Pope gave an address in which he did not say anything about these documents but spoke, rather at length, of the postconciliar period. He added the announcement of a Jubilee and the beginning of the beatification process of Pius XII and John XXIII. This announcement saddens me. Why this glorification of popes by their successors? Will we never abandon these old Roman habits? At the moment of proclaiming the aggiornamento, they perform actions not in accord with it.

He was right then, and he's right now.

When John Paul 11 died and

When John Paul 11 died and the Church, it's people, cried out "Santo Subito" it was a given that very soon John Paul would be on the track to sainthood. I was fortunate to be in his presence and had his blessing. His painting is adorning my living room. I am only one voice in the church but we know when we are in the presence of a saint and he was one. It is a great joy to be able to witness the beatification in our own lifetime rather than waiting until the people he interacted with are dead. God Bless everyone associated with his beatification.

How many more times this week

How many more times this week shall we have to endure this "series" of nonsense?

As I understand it, John Paul

As I understand it, John Paul II dropped the number of miracles down from two to one for sainthood. Gee, just in time. Maybe, and I don't think anyone will take this seriously but shouldn't it stay at two for at least JP II?
Just to keep everyone honest. (What am I saying, it's the vatican).

According to eyewitness

According to eyewitness reports, Jesus only CANONIZED one person. And he was NO SAINT!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Saint-Dismas/113267568686810
Unfortunately, this is just one more prototype from THE FOUNDER that the church blatantly ignores as the world will see on May Day!

I don't have a problem with

I don't have a problem with the canonization of popes per se but I do have a problem with the notion that the way they ruled the Church is somehow not relevant to the canonization process. I think that JPII did not rule the Church well & this should knock him off not just the fast track but the track itself for canonization. He should have had a more hands on rule of the Church than he did. If he had then there would have been less sexual abuse of the young & this is certainly relevant to a cause for canonization.

“Nunquam stercus”

“Nunquam stercus”

Jim. ¿do you have a

Jim. ¿do you have a translation for your esoteric remark?
The word “stercus” has me confused. ¡It couldn’t even be googled!

¿Is it at all related to our fancy Spanish word “estiercol” which means “bovine excrement”? If so, the equivalent in Latin word would be “fimus”.

I’m all curiosity,

Justiniano de Managua

"Stercus" is a masculine

"Stercus" is a masculine noun, and you're right, it's related to "estiercol." Stercus means "excrement." It's actually rather common. Jerome uses it quite a bit in the Vulgate, most notably to translate Paul's σκύβαλον in Phil. 3:8:

Verumtamen existimo omnia detrimentum esse propter eminentem scientiam Jesu Christi Domini mei: propter quem omnia detrimentum feci, et arbitror ut stercora, ut Christum lucrifaciam,

Thank you T.Bolin – you

Thank you T.Bolin – you certainly are a gem. It has been more than 55 years that I have not used Latin, and when I read your quote from Jerome´s Paul to the Phil. 3:8 it feels like honey on my tongue. I like the way Jerome calls a spade a spade. Our Spanish Jerusalem bible, plus several other editions in Spanish, English and several of our local indigenous languages all use the word “garbage” as an equivalent. And of course our very popular and expressive “four letter word” of continual use would hardly be appropriate in a blog. As I say, never too old to learn. Thanks again.

Justiniano de Managua

I guess one is never too old

I guess one is never too old to learn. Back in 1941 I did a study of the TEN GREAT PERSECUTIONS by the Roman emperors, beginning with Nero who killed St. Peter in about the year 67 ce. At the end of the last Roman persecution (303-304), known as “THE Great Persecution” under Emperor Diocletian, Melquiades was pope #32. Constantine won the battle of the Mulvian Bridge in the year 315, and took control of the empire. Melquiades was still pope when the pagan Emperor Constantine convoked, organized, financed and more or less ran the first Ecumenical Council, at Nice in 325 where Christianity was coopted as a means to solidify Constantine’s control over his vast and dispersed domain. It was here that Christianity received its “juridical personality” from the “state”; Padre Arius “with his ideas” was declared a heretic and sent into exile; and, oh yes, Jesus was declared to be divine.

Melquiades was pope # 32 after Peter. Twenty four (24) of those 32 popes died as martyrs for their faith in Jesus’ life plan to change this world and bring about that “other possible society”, that “other possible world”, what Jesus referred to as “ Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.”

The point of all this bla, bla: I had always been under the impression that these 24 martyred popes were known as saints BECAUSE OF THEIR MARTYRDOM – THEIR WITNESSING WITH THEIR LIVES TO THEIR FAITH IN JESUS AND HIS LIFE-PROJECT, THE ONLY REASON FOR HIS LIFE, CRUCIFIXION AND RESURRECTION – THE KINGDOM OF HIS ABBA FATHER HERE ON EARTH.

Now John Allen tells us that: “The first 35 popes traditionally recognized by the church are all considered saints;” So we live and learn: living in Rome seems to broaden “history and faith”.

¿Can we dream of the day when the Bishop of Rome just takes care of his little’old Roman diocese, and “strengthens the faith” of his world wide fellow bishops when they are convoked by him in council? ¿Is that what the Second Vatican Council wanted to bring about when it stressed the “principle of SUBSIDIARITY” in today’s modern world of instant communication ? (oops. that was before our Australian friend Julian Assange and his “Wiki-Leaks”)

Justiniano de Managua

THANK YOU LORD JESUS CHRIST

THANK YOU LORD JESUS CHRIST FOR THE WOUNDERFUL LIFE YOU GAVE TO A LOVING, HUMBLE AND HARMONIOUS MAN POPE JOHN PAUL II.

Rome always has been about

Rome always has been about theatre — which continues to be the profession of the all male hierarchy. But when theatre pretends to be reality, that goes way too far. Conscience is the realm of reality; institutional church (and its actors) is theatre that confuses itself as being conscience. Hello.

John Allen is stretching and

John Allen is stretching and overstating the merits of quick sainthood processes for popes. I wonder why he does not tell the big truth that he knows: IT IS ALL ABOUT POLITICS ALL THE TIME AT THE VATICAN.

Post new comment

NCR Comment code:

  1. Be respectful. Do not attack the writer. Take on the idea, not the messenger.
  2. Use appropriate language. Avoid vulgarities and slurs.
  3. Keep to the point. Deliberate digressions don't aid the discussion.

For more detailed guidelines, visit our User Guidelines page.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
(if you have one; if not, leave this blank)
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <font> <swf> <swf list>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use <swf file="song.mp3"> to display Flash files inline

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This is to prove you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.