Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Pope Ignores Need for Second Miracle in Approving John XXIII Canonization!  (Read 2663 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline stevusmagnus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3728
  • Reputation: +825/-1
  • Gender: Male
    • h
Well, two miracles WERE needed for canonization. Now they're not! In true Neo-Cath style Lombardi brushes away criticism by appealing to the Neo-Cath supreme law: that whatever the Pope does is a-ok. So can a Pope theoretically canonize each of his own family members by fiat when they die? That way they are assured Heaven, right? Canonizations are infallible, and the Pope can canonize whoever he wants and is bound by no rules, so why wouldn't those theoretical canonizations be infallibly valid? What a complete joke. Francis is perfectly exemplifying the neo-ultramontanism of the conciliarists. We are apparently under the supreme rule of Pope Francis and anything he does is correct, every law and tradition of the Church be damned.

Yet when Traditionalists want the Pope to act in their favor..OHHHHH well, we need to send that through this committee, and this other committee, and get the approval of this synod, and then, if the CDF head approves it, then the pope will look at it after 6 advisors make edits to it, and then you MIGHT get 30% of what you want IF you sign this little oath that says you renounce everything you believe in. BTW, we need an answer in 30 days or you're excommunicated. What can we say? The pope's hands are tied!

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/06/world/europe/two-former-popes-are-accepted-for-sainthood.html?_r=0&pagewanted=print

Two Former Popes to Be Made Saints

By RACHEL DONADIO

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis sped two of his predecessors toward sainthood on Friday: John Paul II, who guided the Roman Catholic Church during the end of the cold war, and John XXIII, who assembled the liberalizing Second Vatican Council in the 1960s.

In approving the sainthood of John XXIII even without a second miracle attributable to the pontiff, Francis took the rare step of bypassing the Vatican bureaucracy. Francis also said a Vatican committee had accepted the validity of a second miracle attributed to the intercession of John Paul.

The canonization cause for John Paul began almost immediately after his death in 2005. At his funeral, crowds in St. Peter’s Square began shouting “Santo subito,” or “Sainthood now,” for the beloved pontiff.

John Paul was beatified in May 2011, after a Vatican committee credited him with interceding to cure a French nun, Marie Simon-Pierre Normand, of Parkinson’s disease, the same malady from which the pontiff suffered.

The second miracle attributed to John Paul is said to be the healing of a woman who prayed to the pope on the day of his beatification.

The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, played down the novelty of Francis’s approving the canonization of John XXIII. “There are lots of theologians who in fact discuss the principle of the fact that it’s necessary to have two distinct miracles,” he said. “The pope has the power to rule in a sainthood cause.”

Father Lombardi said it was likely that John Paul and John XXIII would be canonized before the end of the year, although no dates have been set.

At John Paul II’s beatification ceremony, which drew one and a half million people to Rome, Pope Benedict XVI lauded John Paul II as a central figure in the history of the 20th century and a hero of the church.

“He was witness to the tragic age of big ideologies, totalitarian regimes, and from their passing John Paul II embraced the harsh suffering, marked by tension and contradictions, of the transition of the modern age toward a new phase of history, showing constant concern that the human person be its protagonist,” Benedict said at the Mass.




Offline Charlemagne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1439
  • Reputation: +2103/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "And when you shall see Jerusalem compassed about with an army, then know that the desolation thereof is at hand. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst thereof depart out, and those who are in the countries, not enter into it."
    --Saint Luke 21:20-21

    EDIT: Content
    "This principle is most certain: The non-Christian cannot in any way be Pope. The reason for this is that he cannot be head of what he is not a member. Now, he who is not a Christian is not a member of the Church, and a manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and others. Therefore, the manifest heretic cannot be Pope." -- St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline MariaCatherine

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1061
    • Reputation: +353/-9
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Very distressing, and very telling.
    What return shall I make to the Lord for all the things that He hath given unto me?

    Offline Dana

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 83
    • Reputation: +91/-1
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Fr. Luigi Villa said this was coming.  All the Cardinals ignored him too.  Rather telling, isn't it?

    Offline Tyler

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 46
    • Reputation: +32/-1
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I have no problem with the canonization of John Paul II. He did great things while he was the pope. While I don't agree with all of the things he did, such as the excommunication of the SSPX bishops, but that doesn't change the other things he did. He did what the papacy was asked to do back at Fatima. He consecrated Russia, which the popes before him failed to do. He helped stop the Soviet Union. All saints made mistakes, but those mistakes are always overshadowed by their accomplishments. He had his miracles confirmed. I support his canonization.

    I was surprised that Pope Francis chose to bypass the process for John XXIII, though. I see no reason for his canonization. I think Sister Lúcia of Fátima would have been a better choice for someone to canonize without having their two miracles verified.


    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +825/-1
    • Gender: Male
      • h
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In addition, St. Josemaria's successor Bishop Portillo is going to be beatified, plus Francis wants to move ahead with the beatification of  Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador who was indirectly tied to the liberation theology movement.

    http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/three-things-learn-about-francis-his-sainthood-surprise

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3849/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Maybe one day I will be beatified.  :smoke-pot:
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline Charlemagne

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1439
    • Reputation: +2103/-18
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matto
    Maybe one day I will be beatified.  :smoke-pot:


    Not as long as you're a Catholic.
    "This principle is most certain: The non-Christian cannot in any way be Pope. The reason for this is that he cannot be head of what he is not a member. Now, he who is not a Christian is not a member of the Church, and a manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and others. Therefore, the manifest heretic cannot be Pope." -- St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline Napoli

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 716
    • Reputation: +707/-0
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's articles like this which cause one to consider the sede position? Sigh.

    Although, what other option do we have?
    Regina Angelorum, ora pro nobis!

    Offline Stephen Francis

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 682
    • Reputation: +861/-1
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What cracks me up is that in the middle of this thread is a banner ad for the JPII "the UnGreat" school of so-called theology. The irony is delicious; the reality is sickening.

    Veni, Domini Jesu!
    This evil of heresy spreads itself. The doctrines of godliness are overturned; the rules of the Church are in confusion; the ambition of the unprincipled seizes upon places of authority; and the chief seat [the Papacy] is now openly proposed as a rewar

    Offline Charlemagne

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1439
    • Reputation: +2103/-18
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Stephen Francis
    What cracks me up is that in the middle of this thread is a banner ad for the JPII "the UnGreat" school of so-called theology. The irony is delicious; the reality is sickening.

    Veni, Domini Jesu!


    Well, there's no denying that he was a theologian. Of what, I don't know. I just know that it wasn't Catholicism.
    "This principle is most certain: The non-Christian cannot in any way be Pope. The reason for this is that he cannot be head of what he is not a member. Now, he who is not a Christian is not a member of the Church, and a manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and others. Therefore, the manifest heretic cannot be Pope." -- St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline MariaCatherine

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1061
    • Reputation: +353/-9
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It hasn't happened yet, but if it does, maybe canonizations aren't infallible after all?

    Or could this be a kind of crucifixion and death of the Mystical Body of Christ, His Church?

    All I'm sure of is that I can't allow myself to be tempted to leave the Church, no matter what happens.
    What return shall I make to the Lord for all the things that He hath given unto me?

    Offline ServusSpiritusSancti

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8212
    • Reputation: +7173/-7
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Tyler
    I have no problem with the canonization of John Paul II. He did great things while he was the pope. While I don't agree with all of the things he did, such as the excommunication of the SSPX bishops, but that doesn't change the other things he did. He did what the papacy was asked to do back at Fatima. He consecrated Russia, which the popes before him failed to do. He helped stop the Soviet Union. All saints made mistakes, but those mistakes are always overshadowed by their accomplishments. He had his miracles confirmed. I support his canonization.

    I was surprised that Pope Francis chose to bypass the process for John XXIII, though. I see no reason for his canonization. I think Sister Lúcia of Fátima would have been a better choice for someone to canonize without having their two miracles verified.


    So I guess you consider covering up sex abuse scandals, holding two blasphemous inter-religious meetings at Assisi, denying Church teaching on the role of a man and woman in marriage, and allowing women to be altar servers were actions worthy of Sainthood?

    You're also incorrect that he "Consecrated Russia". He "consecrated the world", which isn't what Our Lady asked. If the Consecration had truly been performed, the era of peace promised by Our Lady would already have occurred. It hasn't, though.

    Please ignore ALL of my posts. I was naive during my time posting on this forum and didn’t know any better. I retract and deeply regret any and all uncharitable or erroneous statements I ever made here.

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3849/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is okay, I guess Tyler is not a traditional Catholic or maybe he just doesn't know a lot about the bad things John Paul II did. In fact, I have forgotten most of what I knew about the bad things John Paul II did, though I remember that they were bad and many.
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline Capt McQuigg

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4671
    • Reputation: +2624/-10
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Was John Paul II an open syncretist?  

    Is holding group prayer sessions with all the religions of the world implicitly saying that all religions are basically the same?

    I haven't actually studied John Paul II.  Most of his writing is just modernist jibberish.  Compare the opening paragraphs in his encyclical on the rosary with Pope Leo XIII's opening paragraphs on the Holy Rosary for a difference.  John Paul II comes across as a non-believer trying to placate the people he probably considered "idiots" (these are the believers) in a writing style that told the sophisticates in the mainstream press that he was just putting out the expected drivel.  John Paul II's writing style was jibberish but the strain of modernism is in it everywhere.

    Fr Z wrote an article about how the rosary was pretty near suppressed in his seminary when he was a student there.  This was during the 1980's.  My question?  Who gave the order to suppress the rosary?  It must have come from the very top.  I think it's possible that through official chanels but never officially written down, Pope John Paul II wanted to be seen on TV holding a rosary but that he wanted the practice of the rosary to disappear from the novus ordo priesthood.  

    The conciliar church continued to shrink, shrink, shrink during JPII reign.  And in the wake of his manufactured public events, like World Youth Day, there was never a reawakening of the Catholic faith in the aftermath of these events.  I guess because JP II was preaching ecuмenism and conciliarism and not Catholicism.  

    So, JPII concealed and moved around and tried to hide sɛҳuąƖly molesting presiders, right?  

    What else?  

    What good did he really do?  No offense intended to anyone but he Soviet Union was going to collapse anyway and the American press wanted to give JPII the credit just so they could deny it to Reagan.

    JPII signed and promulgated a Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1994 which permits giving the eucharist to non-Catholics.  
     
    And I haven't even studied the guy.  What would I find if I put my nose to the grindstone?