FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Is anybody here against the canonization of Bishop Sheen?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
(09-24-2009, 01:12 AM)SoCalLocal Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-24-2009, 12:19 AM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: [ -> ]It's neither.  I emphasized the HEARD part, because I trust FE for information on Catholic stuff.  If anyone is going to know anything BAD about a bishop, it's going to be here, or two other trad-Catholic forums.
Now I wonder if that's calumniating Trads?

He's quite right.  Where else will he find nuggets likes this:

Fulton J. Sheen, Footprints in a Darkened Forest, 1967 Wrote:It is very likely that within fifty years when all the trivial, verbal disputes about Teilhard's unfortunate vocabulary will have died away or have taken a secondary place, Teilhard will appear like St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila, as the Spiritual genius of the twentieh century.

(09-24-2009, 06:44 PM)Walty Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-24-2009, 04:53 PM)OCLittleFlower Wrote: [ -> ]From the sounds of it, having two investigations is better because no one has a conflict of interest.  But then, I think the general "everyone goes to heaven" midset has taken over a bit, and caused even the Vatican to be willing to loosen the requirements for sainthood.

Aren't we speaking about this in the wrong way, however?  I mean, if the Church says that one is in heaven we must believe that the are.  To doubt this would either be to doubt the Holy Spirit or to be a sede. 

The only way the Church could "loosen" requirements for sainthood would be if they just let us officially know more people who are getting into heaven than they used to.

Exactly. To doubt those that have been officially Sainted by the Church as Sainted because the process has changed is to ignore the protection of the Holy Spirit and infallibility, and thus, deny the faith. It sounds like some people here are saying that we should be suspicious of all those sainted post VII?  ???
Does "the protection of the Holy Spirit" mean that it would be fine if they named saints by putting their names on a big board and throwing darts at them?  I think what people are saying is that the process should be as thorough as possible, that the humans running the process do their best and not complacently assume the Holy Spirit will prevent mistakes.  A "God helps those who help themselves" kind of situation.

After all, an official "saint" isn't just someone who's in heaven; it's also someone who led a life of "heroic virtue" here on earth (at least after conversion).  There could be many people in heaven whose lives were less exemplary, whose example would be less clear and perhaps problematic to follow.  Does the protection of the Holy Spirit only guarantee that canonized saints are in heaven, or does it guarantee that they are excellent models for us?  That's an honest question; I don't know the answer.
(09-25-2009, 09:10 AM)Mhoram Wrote: [ -> ]Does "the protection of the Holy Spirit" mean that it would be fine if they named saints by putting their names on a big board and throwing darts at them?  I think what people are saying is that the process should be as thorough as possible, that the humans running the process do their best and not complacently assume the Holy Spirit will prevent mistakes.  A "God helps those who help themselves" kind of situation.

After all, an official "saint" isn't just someone who's in heaven; it's also someone who led a life of "heroic virtue" here on earth (at least after conversion).  There could be many people in heaven whose lives were less exemplary, whose example would be less clear and perhaps problematic to follow.  Does the protection of the Holy Spirit only guarantee that canonized saints are in heaven, or does it guarantee that they are excellent models for us?  That's an honest question; I don't know the answer.

And that's a fair question. But the fact still remains that those the Church says are in Heaven are in Heaven, y'know?
(09-25-2009, 09:13 AM)savienu Wrote: [ -> ]And that's a fair question. But the fact still remains that those the Church says are in Heaven are in Heaven, y'know?

I don't think anyone's disputing that.  I don't think anyone's saying Pope JPII (for instance) shouldn't be canonized because they don't think he could be in Heaven.  I think they're saying, whether he's in Heaven or not, canonizing him would lend credence to some problematic things he said and did in the area of ecumenism.  Canonization says much more than that the person is in Heaven; it says we should pattern our lives around his.
(09-25-2009, 10:00 AM)Mhoram Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-25-2009, 09:13 AM)savienu Wrote: [ -> ]And that's a fair question. But the fact still remains that those the Church says are in Heaven are in Heaven, y'know?

I don't think anyone's disputing that.  I don't think anyone's saying Pope JPII (for instance) shouldn't be canonized because they don't think he could be in Heaven.  I think they're saying, whether he's in Heaven or not, canonizing him would lend credence to some problematic things he said and did in the area of ecumenism.  Canonization says much more than that the person is in Heaven; it says we should pattern our lives around his.

Right, I understand what you are saying completely. Plenty of people get to heaven after spending lots of and lots of time in Purgatory making up for scandalous things they did in their lifetime (and I'll be one of them.) The canonized Saints should be ones that we actually saw in their life overcome adversities and/or past sins, such as St. Augustine. They should be the "best of the best." I think there's probably a reason JPII isn't a blessed yet.
I believe that Abp. Sheen should at least be put through the usual process for a determination. I think he was a good, holy and devout man and a true servant of God, though he was lead astray toward the end by the new churchmen who tried to liberalize EVERYTHING and scrap all sense of piety. I don't think Abp. Sheen veered from the Faith and I also feel he helped many who otherwise wouldn't have, find the Truth Faith which is the Catholic Church.
A very good and short biography talking about Fulton J. Sheen, mentioning the good points and some of the not so good points.

http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Cathol...-Sheen.htm

Overall he comes out favourably, and most of his writings are excellent.  But sainthood is something that should be reserved for the exceptionally few, without any question of doctrinal integrity.  I'm inclined to put him in the Mother Teresa camp: they were good people who did good work, and simply leave it at that. 
(09-25-2009, 01:32 PM)PeterII Wrote: [ -> ]A very good and short biography talking about Fulton J. Sheen, mentioning the good points and some of the not so good points.

http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Cathol...-Sheen.htm

Overall he comes out favourably, and most of his writings are excellent.  But sainthood is something that should be reserved for the exceptionally few, without any question of doctrinal integrity.  I'm inclined to put him in the Mother Teresa camp: they were good people who did good work, and simply leave it at that. 
Thank you, that was a wonderful contribution.

We all carry the seeds of our greatness and destruction. On any given day we ignorantly plant. We only know which will mainfest as time passes.
There's a website dedicated to his cause for Canonization:

http://www.archbishopsheencause.org

He supported Vatican II and all the changes, but he also seemed frustrated at all of the changes at the end of his life. It particularly pained him that, by the end of the 1970's, hardly anyone went to Confession anymore. He said something along the lines of "When the lines to the Confessional started to dwindle is when the lines to the psychologist's and psychiatrist's offices started to grow."

Pages: 1 2 3 4