The points for the canonization of John XXIII reported on in the article linked above seem to me to heavily dwell on his view of non-Catholics and how non-Catholics viewed him. Fairly cosistent with theme of the title of this thread regarding kissing the @$$es of prot HERETICS!
"Council fathers" advocating canonization are quoted as saying something to the effect of John XXIII demonstrating that the world and the Church are not alienated from each other. That is most reassuring in light of what the world was evolving into (and recognizedly so) at the time of the statement and what the world has become today!!
His fan club were the type who got "warm fuzzies" about such things as "a hard-bitten, non-Catholic journalist who, after seeing John XXIII in central Rome, enthused, 'I could just kiss the man.'" Who cares whether the journalist was a mason, klansman, prot, moslem, jew, hindu, buddhist, atheist, etc., so long as he was not Catholic and the pope had enamoured himself to this non-Catgolic who earlier Popes and lay Catholics would likely found deserving of
Of all of the atrocities of the NO, this seeking "unity" and to homogenize with heretical prots particularly disturbs me. The Church is the bride of Christ; to unify means to make one. Thus the question, is this an effort to make a whore of the bride of Christ or to subject her to rape?
I am severely dismayed by this emphasis on unity and "fitting in!" When you're the one with the map and the truth, why give in, appease, compromise, or otherwise wimp out in favor of erroneous directions or falsehoods?!?
Truth is truth and, at least "truth" of the nature of what has been taught by the Church for centuries, deserves to STAND simply be explained and taught! Truth should not be repackaged, restated, compromised, etc. for the appeasement of dissenters.
Why should the Church parse words on its teachings regarding justification to appease HERETICS who are still going to disagree in substance? My image of the Church is that of unwavering stength, a true ROCK, if you will. Could wimping out, backing down, and appeasing be the product of too many who are "light on their feet," or otherwise effiminate, flooding the Church and ascending to power?
The points contained in the article linked above made in favor of canonizing John XXIII would more aptly be made for a posthumous excommunication! I had strained myself to chalk his calling the council at such an inopportune time up to stupidity. I'm sadly coming to believe he was cognizant of, and thus culpable for, what he was doing.