FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Beatification of John Paul II coming next year?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
http://www.romereports.com/palio/John-Pa...-2889.html  According to this report, it could indeed happen sometime next year. Will this pose a problem for traditionalists? For many trads, JP2 has, at the very least, been a very controversial figure. Will we be able to put that aside if indeed he is beatified, and even perhaps canonized? I'll be interested to see the reactions.
A Montrealer is being canonized on Sunday, Brother André. On the occasion, the local SSPX chapter printed some articles about post Vatican II canonizations in their bulletin - one about Brother Andre (the refuse to attend any NO celebrations in his honor) and the other a reprint from Fideliter magazine. It's a real difficult issue for them. In prudence they don't recognize post V2 canonizations. However they admit that papal infallibility is used to canonize. They have to do some real theological gymnastics to not be sedevacantists and yet not official honor new saints proclaimed by the church. That'll be an interesting one to iron out. I'd post the article they shared, but it's in French. What they're trying to argue is that V2 left such a theological mess in it's wake that Pope John Paul II couldve had impaired intent to canonize, but even the article admits that this is extremely difficult to prove.

The author says they can't just accept saints they like (Padre Pio) and reject those of doubtful character (Dom Escriva). He calls this an impossible choice and concludes that they will need to continue studying the matter.

On a more practical note, there is an issue of the 1962 calendar. The feast of brother Andre will be January 6. But this is the date of Epiphany in the 1962 calendar (in the new calendar it's been moved to Sunday). So what's the solution? Put the feast of brother Andre on a different day? And who would decide that?
(10-15-2010, 10:36 PM)Bakuryokuso Wrote: [ -> ]On a more practical note, there is an issue of the 1962 calendar. The feast of brother Andre will be January 6. But this is the date of Epiphany in the 1962 calendar (in the new calendar it's been moved to Sunday). So what's the solution? Put the feast of brother Andre on a different day? And who would decide that?

I'm not sure if those using the 1962 missal are obliged to celebrate the feasts of post 62 saints, and even if they were, Epiphany would take precedence anyway, being a 1st class feast (I think), so I doubt it's going to be an issue.

Blessings,
Pray
Steve
Thanks Bakuryokuso for posting your info. I have taken the liberty of copying your post to a different thread as it is very relevant to a question I was asking.
http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...68.30.html

c.
Just one more piece of bad legislation that the powers that be want to shove through to the benefit of a group and the denigration of the whole.
I've seen other reports that this nun didn't have Parkinson's to begin with, so it's a dubious miracle.
(10-16-2010, 06:19 AM)Stevo Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not sure if those using the 1962 missal are obliged to celebrate the feasts of post 62 saints, and even if they were,

A decision from some Vatican dicastery last year explicitly banned the mixing of the Calendars. No reason was given but probably the Vatican want to prevent the creation of new offices and masses for the new saints, or someone from the liberal side wants to keep the fossil look of the traditional liturgy.

In the new liturgy the Epiphany is celebrated on the first Sunday after New Years day. The Church has power over the Calendar as the first Nicean council strictly  defined.
(10-15-2010, 10:16 PM)Christopher Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.romereports.com/palio/John-Pa...-2889.html  According to this report, it could indeed happen sometime next year. Will this pose a problem for traditionalists? For many trads, JP2 has, at the very least, been a very controversial figure. Will we be able to put that aside if indeed he is beatified, and even perhaps canonized? I'll be interested to see the reactions.

If that heretic is canonized I will certainly be of the opinion that Rome has lost the faith and become an SV. What will they make him patron Saint of pedophiles?
(10-15-2010, 10:36 PM)Bakuryokuso Wrote: [ -> ]A Montrealer is being canonized on Sunday, Brother André. On the occasion, the local SSPX chapter printed some articles about post Vatican II canonizations in their bulletin - one about Brother Andre (the refuse to attend any NO celebrations in his honor) and the other a reprint from Fideliter magazine. It's a real difficult issue for them. In prudence they don't recognize post V2 canonizations. However they admit that papal infallibility is used to canonize. They have to do some real theological gymnastics to not be sedevacantists and yet not official honor new saints proclaimed by the church. That'll be an interesting one to iron out. I'd post the article they shared, but it's in French. What they're trying to argue is that V2 left such a theological mess in it's wake that Pope John Paul II couldve had impaired intent to canonize, but even the article admits that this is extremely difficult to prove.

It doesn't take a lot of gymnastics.  Theologians pretty much hold the mechanism of infallibility in canonization is the process as wielded by the Pope.  It isn't part of a personal Papal infalliblity like ex cathedra.

JP2 dumbed down the process so it is no longer the same.  Is it still infallible?  Maybe, maybe not.

The other question goes to prudence:  it may very well be the act is still infallible - these people are in heaven with certainty which is what canonization means.  However, it may not be prudent to hold certain people up because they may have gotten into heaven via a deathbed confession.  I have never heard that the prudence of canonizing or not canonizing is infallible. 

JP2 might have gotten clean into heaven skipping purgatory . We don't know.  But that doesn't mean it is a good idea to make him a Saint.  In fact, objectively, it is a very bad one because it gives a stamp of approval not only to good things he did, but some very "iffy" ones.

The prudence of sainthood was protected by the devil's advocate and the criteria for heroic virtue.  Those are gone or dumbed down, so even if canonization is still infallible, we'll be getting some dumbed down saints in the mix as well now.  By dumbed down I mean they aren't examples of heroic virtue that we should follow in our lives.
(10-17-2010, 06:13 PM)Baskerville Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-15-2010, 10:16 PM)Christopher Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.romereports.com/palio/John-Pa...-2889.html  According to this report, it could indeed happen sometime next year. Will this pose a problem for traditionalists? For many trads, JP2 has, at the very least, been a very controversial figure. Will we be able to put that aside if indeed he is beatified, and even perhaps canonized? I'll be interested to see the reactions.

If that heretic is canonized I will certainly be of the opinion that Rome has lost the faith and become an SV. What will they make him patron Saint of pedophiles?

Knee jerk reactions aren't helpful.  If you want to become a SV just do it and stop confusing others with broken theology.  JP2 being canonized doesn't prove SV any more than it proves he is "JP2 the great" to the EWTNites.  Really all it proves is the canonization process needs to go back to the old ways.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5