Why We Need Not (and Should Not) Call Paul VI ‘Saint’
An article by Dr Peter Kwasniewski on One Peter Five.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
  “Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog also.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'

[-] The following 4 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • MagisterMusicae, Roger Buck, Some Guy, Vulgate
I think the most important part of this article is that it taught me the previously organic nature of venerating potential saints and the long held, well developed process of beatification.

JPII just turned it into a propaganda tool.

I really hope one day when the restoration happens all post-conciliar “saints” are shoved into a new quaternary category below venerable and then their process can start over from scratch when an actual cultus develops around one of them.
[-] The following 5 users Like Some Guy's post:
  • austenbosten, jovan66102, MagisterMusicae, Vulgate, Zedta
awesome, if the mind set is to go down this road, then John Paul the II needs to be in this category as well considering it was under his leadership that this sex abuse scandal was primarily taking place, and maybe even the pope before him.

I do believe that the title of saint, is merely a propaganda tool now, more than any actual deserved title, from an actual miracle, which the title is supposed to be verified through three miracles, which seems that only two will suffice and only one is ever reported. The standards seem to be very loose and then one has to consider the finances involved to canonize a person to sainthood.

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)