FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Saint Archbishop Fulton Sheen?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Today after the last Mass, my parish (which is FSSP) was going to be showing a movie about Archbishop Fulton Sheen as part of the "information process for the campaign to canonize him."  My priest took no position on this when he made the annoucement, and I did not stay to see the film because I went to an earlier Mass, and it was going to be shown at 1pm.  I'm not familiar with Archbishop Sheen really at all, so I'm wondering if you all have some opinions, or if anyone has been following this process.

Apparently, his cause was started in 2002.  He died in 1979.  I know that we are under the New Code of Canon Law which vastly changed the process for canonization--perhaps someone can refresh my memory as to the old form?  For some reason, the number "50 years" stays in my head as the previous waiting period after death, though I could be quite wrong.  I have been researching a little about the huge flood of canonization which have occurred under Popes JPII and Benedict XVI, which are actually more saints than ever, apparently.  Some people have questioned especially the application of "martyr" to certain saints canonized recently.  I only started looking into this recently after having seen the quote from Cardinal Silvio Oddi (a quote which has been seen on this forum before) that the Vatican had become a "real saint-factory."  Interesting statement from a cardinal, no? 

Has anyone else any thoughts on this?
Quote:Has anyone else any thoughts on this?

Yeah. Maybe we should go back to the old system of sainthood by popular acclaim? Centralization in Rome seems to have just made a whole lot of Italian saints, at the expense of local ones.

I don't really care if the modern popes are "inflating" the number of saints, but I do think it's ridiculous, not to mention self-serving, that almost every 20th century pope has his own cause for canonization. For the sake of some sort of neutrality, I think non-martyr popes should be off-limits for canonization on principle.
I am waiting for Credo to make the case of Sainthood for Mohammad.  LOL

I like HK's return to acclamation of saints. I'm thinking here of a very good Servite priest that fought Cardinal Cody tooth and nail to keep the TLM. He was eventually recalled to Rome and they dragged him there screaming and crying, but at that time most Italo-Americans were madder than hell at Cardinal Cody. This priest was a humble guy, but because of where his Church was located he had to know many of the power brokers in the city, to keep his little parish going. He had special Dinners in the hall with great well known chefs ( Italo-American Catholics ) putting on a great feast, and all of the cognoscenti attended, and payed big money for the priveledge.  Between the parishoners, and the Italo-Americans in the city, and the influential Big shots, he would have been a candidate. 
There have been different procedures in different periods. St. Francis was canonized by Gregory IX in the 13th century less than 2 years after his death. St. Therese was canonized by Pius XI 28 years after her death, so even then it appears there was no 50 year waiting period. Also, I just went through most of  the canonizations done by Pius XII and a lot of them were done less than 50 years after the Saint's death. I don't know all the details of the various procedures that were in use in different periods, so the 50 year period may have been used at some point, but it definitely was not in place at all times, nor in the period directly preceding the enactment of the 1983 Code.

Alos, if you go through the actual Saints canonized by John Paul II, it becomes a little less suprising why there was a flood of canonizations--there was a flood of persecutions in the preceding centuries and therefore a great many opportunities for heroic virtue. Here's a list of links to bios of all the Saints canonized by him:

http://saints.sqpn.com/canonized-by-pope-john-paul-ii/

HK Wrote:I don't really care if the modern popes are "inflating" the number of saints, but I do think it's ridiculous, not to mention self-serving, that almost every 20th century pope has his own cause for canonization. For the sake of some sort of neutrality, I think non-martyr popes should be off-limits for canonization on principle.

To be fair, most 20th century Popes have had popular acclaim due to the rise of mass communications--the people are more likely to feel like they know the Pope and to have a filial devotion to him. The Popes of the second millenium were pretty detached from the common people (it was just the nature of their job)--the people probably knew his name, but that's about it. The ones who were canonized were the exceptions: St. Pius V actually went around washing the feet of the sick, St. Celestine V was well known as a holy hermit before his election, and St. Gregory VII was pretty much a "superstar" his entire ecclesiastical career.
(11-29-2010, 12:52 AM)The_Harlequin_King Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote:Has anyone else any thoughts on this?

Yeah. Maybe we should go back to the old system of sainthood by popular acclaim? Centralization in Rome seems to have just made a whole lot of Italian saints, at the expense of local ones.

I don't really care if the modern popes are "inflating" the number of saints, but I do think it's ridiculous, not to mention self-serving, that almost every 20th century pope has his own cause for canonization. For the sake of some sort of neutrality, I think non-martyr popes should be off-limits for canonization on principle.
edit: nvm