The only way out is to draw the double conclusion that follows: Karol Wojtyla cannot be canonized and the act that would proclaim his sanctity in front of the Church could only be a false canonization.Link
Three serious reasons authorize the faithful Catholic to doubt the merits of the new beatifications and canonizations.
Firstly, the reforms that followed the Council have produced as a consequence certain inadequacies in the process,
and secondly, they have introduced a new collegial intention, two consequences that are incompatible with the soundness of beatifications and the infallibility of canonizations.
Thirdly, the judgment that occurs in the process involves a conception of sanctity and heroic virtue at the very least equivocal and hence dubious.
In the context resulting from the post-conciliar reforms, the pope and the bishops offer to the veneration of faithful Catholics authentic saints, but canonized at the conclusion of an inadequate and doubtful procedure.
Thus there can be no doubt that Padre Pio, canonized after Vatican II, practiced the virtues in a heroic degree even though the new style of process that concluded with the proclamation of his virtues can only give one pause.
On the other hand, the same procedure makes possible canonizations that would have once been unthinkable, in which the title of holiness is conferred upon faithful departed whose reputation is controversial and in whom the exercise of virtue in the heroic degree is not particularly outstanding.
Is it certain that for the popes who have accomplished these newfangled canonizations, heroic virtue is what it was for all their predecessors until Vatican II?
This unwonted situation can be explained by the confusion introduced by the post-conciliar reforms. It cannot be dispelled without getting to the root cause and examining the soundness of these reforms.