Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Funny Stuff for Catholics => Topic started by: ThatBritPapist on January 01, 2023, 07:32:49 AM
-
(Before I get any Replies about "muh the procedure of canonization", this is only a hypothetical and a fun little thread)
I would Personally choose Reginald Garriou-Lagrange OP.
Not only would Lagrange be a leading figures in the Neo-Thomistic movement ,who rejuvenated Thomism in the modern west, but he would be a staunch Anti-Modernist, Lagrange would fiercely teach St Pius X encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascendi_Dominici_gregis) and he would see it reconfirmed in Pius XII (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pius_XII)'s Humani generis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humani_generis).
Lagrange Piety as an OP and his Faithfulness to a Traditional Eternal Rome should be forever remembered.
-
Marcel Lefebvre
-
Venerable Pius IX
-
Marie Julie Jehenney
Josefa Menendez
(I know that's two)
-
Marcel Lefebvre
That was an the obvious saintly choice.
God Bless Mons Abp Lefebvre!
To Quote the Post Consecration Chants of Bp Licino Rangel
"Viva Dom Antonio De Castro Mayer" " Viva Dom Marcel Lefebvre"
-
Leo XIII
-
Fr. Leonard Feeney, who fought the good fight against the termites and worms before the house fell.
You asked . . . :cowboy:
-
Christopher Columbus
Queen Isabella
Antonio Margil de Jesus
Mary of Agreda
Demetrius Augustine Gallitzin
Tomas de Torquemada
Fr. De Smet
Arnold Damen, SJ
Fr. Leonard Feeney
-
Father Daniel Cooper
-
Father Daniel Cooper
Another great choice.
Some older trads might also recall Fr. John of the Cross of the traditional Benedictines.
-
Archbishop Lefebvre is the obvious choice. I would probably take a good hard look at Savonarola, too.
-
Venerable Pius IX
Yes, absolutely.
-
Archbishop Lefebvre is the obvious choice. I would probably take a good hard look at Savonarola, too.
Mith,
Savonarola, very interesting. Good one.
-
Christopher Columbus
Queen Isabella
Antonio Margil de Jesus
Mary of Agreda
Demetrius Augustine Gallitzin
Tomas de Torquemada
Fr. De Smet
Arnold Damen, SJ
Fr. Leonard Feeney
Queen Isabella of Castille and Tomas De Torquemada perfectly match!
-
Leo XIII
I think People Underestimate his Impact in Regards against Free market Usury with the abhorrent evils of Laissez-Faire Capitalism and how it allow Bourgeois ((Foreign)) Influence.
His Political Economic thinking is up there with Louis De Bonald ,another good contender, for his Anti-Enlightenment and Counter-Revolution work.
-
Saint Patrick of Ireland.
-
Saint Patrick of Ireland.
That is actually a smart point, there was no formal canonization process in the Catholic Church during the Period.Only Saint by name like they
-
Archbishop Thuc
-
Myself? :trollface:
Otherwise, Girolamo Savonarola
-
Saint Patrick of Ireland.
Ridiculous. He’s held as a saint by the Catholic Church as are all saints before formal papal canonizations were in vogue. Are you questioning the status of all saints before that time?
-
My mom and Rodrigo Diaz.
-
I know my choices are controversial and a hard sell, but I would canonize either Pope Julius II or Pope Paul IV.
-
I know my choices are controversial and a hard sell, but I would canonize either Pope Julius II or Pope Paul IV.
Do tell me why chose Julius II and Paul IV
-
My wife Elizabeth, died 26/1/22.
-
My wife Elizabeth, died 26/1/22.
Sorry to hear that, Cassini.
-
(Before I get any Replies about "muh the procedure of canonization", this is only a hypothetical and a fun little thread)
I would Personally choose Reginald Garriou-Lagrange OP.
Not only would Lagrange be a leading figures in the Neo-Thomistic movement ,who rejuvenated Thomism in the modern west, but he would be a staunch Anti-Modernist, Lagrange would fiercely teach St Pius X encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascendi_Dominici_gregis) and he would see it reconfirmed in Pius XII (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pius_XII)'s Humani generis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humani_generis).
Lagrange Piety as an OP and his Faithfulness to a Traditional Eternal Rome should be forever remembered.
I get it, but canonization requires not just good theology but also heroic sanctity, so one would have to look into his personal life very deeply, obtain the necessary miracles, etc. ... perhaps you could start by asking his intercession for some miraculous cause.
Of course, it's quite clear that this is precisely what the Conciliar Church has done, use canonization for political reasons. As even Michael Matt admitted, Roncalli and Montini were not canonized on account of heroic virtue and sanctity but because they were attempting to endorse and "canonize", as it were, Vatican II itself.
But I guess it would be true of all these suggestions, where we add "... assuming that an investigation finds personal sanctity and heroic virtue".
-
Fr. Leonard Feeney, who fought the good fight against the termites and worms before the house fell.
You asked . . . :cowboy:
Ditto ^^^ ... again, assuming that he's found to have exercised heroic sanctity. Father Feeney was literally the lone voice calling out the decay and Modernism in the Church in the late 1940s and the 1950s ... when everybody else thought that things were perfectly fine with the Church. He was opposing Vatican II before it happened.
I would also add ... Father Janos Brenner
https://hi-in.facebook.com/spspaltaloma/posts/december-15-is-the-feast-day-and-anniversary-of-the-death-of-blessed-father-john/3628209823921540/
Not only did he die a martyr for the Holy Eucharist, and also for providing Last Rites (he was out in a "fake" call for Last Rites and ambushed), but reading some of his spiritual diaries, this young priest sounded like a male equivalent of St. Therese.
I might also consider Cardinal Mindszenty, except that he tragically gave in to the Conciliar Church and the New Mass before his death.
-
Marie Julie Jehenney
Josefa Menendez
(I know that's two)
While I would concur with Marie Julie Jaheny based on her heroic sanctity, there's a bit of a question about whether all the writings attributed to her are genuine, and the Church would have to diligently go through them. That's why Mary of Agreda and Katherine Emmerich were not canonized, because canonization could give a misleading impression that the Church endorsed all of her writings / statements a divinely revealed in private revelation. To me that's a bit dangerous.
I would certainly open the cause for Padre Pio though ... since the Conciliar canonizations are bogus.
-
Leo XIII
Unfortunately, I would have to disagree. Pope Leo XIII was a bit too friendly with the Modernists, which is why St. Pius X had such a battle on his hands when he was elected. There were a few things in Pope Leo's Encyclicals that the Modernists regularly pounce on to undermine Sacred Scripture.
-
Father Daniel Cooper
I would also open his cause ... waiting for the miracles. I never found a better confessor, someone who loved souls more. Of concern, however, would be allegations that he was involved a bit in the coverup of sɛҳuąƖ predators in SSPX ... and that would have to be investigated.
-
Archbishop Thuc
While I think that he was a good and holy man overall, despite Bishop Kelly's smear campaign, I do think that he's tainted a bit by the Palmar fiasco, and that would have to be investigated.
-
I'm afraid the Vatican will be canonizing fake Sr Lucy ll. ( after Benedict, of Course)
-
In addition to some others already mentioned in this thread (e.g. +Lefebvre), I would add Emperor Charles of Austria-Hungary. (17 August 1887 – 1 April 1922)
-
Do tell me why chose Julius II and Paul IV
Pope Paul IV was extremely orthodox and gave heretics and liberals no quarter. He recognized the Catholic queen of England, Mary, over the Protestant Elizabeth as the legitimate ruler of England. His Papal bull cuм Ex Apostolatus Officio (which, if I remember correctly, was referenced in the 1917 Code of Canon Law), explicitly prohibits manifest heretics from validly obtaining ecclesiastical office, especially with the Papacy. He built a wall to quarantine the Jews in Rome and made them pay for it (Trump, take notes!), and declared that no more than one ѕуηαgσgυє could exist in each city, which led to the destruction of seven ѕуηαgσgυєs in Rome. He also appointed the future Pope St Pius V as the Supreme Inquisitor. He mercilessly stamped out clerical corruption In summation, he was radically orthodox and did everything in his power to safeguard Catholicism against the rising threats of the time.
Pope Julius II did a lot to strengthen Papal influence in Europe and funded great works of pious art. He also (rightfully) liberated the Papal States from the corruption of the Borgias, delivering a scathing rebuke of the Borgia Pope Alexander VI. He also personally led the Papal army in battle.
While both men certainly had their flaws throughout their lives, I think it's reasonable to believe that both were in a state of grace when they died based on what was written about them at the hour of their deaths. They're definitely not first ballot candidates for sainthood, as a advocatus diaboli could easily bring forth arguments against them. However, I think both of them exhibited bravery and a love for the Catholic faith that hopefully inspires passion for the faith.
-
While I think that he was a good and holy man overall, despite Bishop Kelly's smear campaign, I do think that he's tainted a bit by the Palmar fiasco, and that would have to be investigated.
I do agree that the Palmar consecrations are a significant mark against him, along with conditionally consecrating at least one Old Catholic bishop. But given that Archbishop Thuc consecrated Michel-Louis Guérard des Lauriers and Moises Carmona, which has bore bountiful fruit in preserving the Mass, providing the sacraments globally, and ensuring the continuation of the priesthood and the episcopacy, I think the good outweighs the bad in this situation. I pray that God has mercy on him for his missteps.
-
#1 Father Joseph Collins... Requiescat in Pace! :pray:
...
There were a lot of other good people named.
I would to add some more recent holy clerics:
Father William Fredrick Faber
(Author of Growth in Holiness)
Father Lasance
(Author of the Catholic Girls Guide)
Cardinal Merry del Val
(Author of the Litany of Humility)
(Secretary to Pope Saint Pius X)
Father Henri Le Floch
(He was the head of the French seminary in Rome when Archbishop Lefebvre was there before he was forced to retire after Pius X died for being a monarchist...)
Louis (Cardinal) Billot
(Author of the book Liberalism...and food friends with Father Le Floch... He resigned being a cardinal when Le Floch was kicked.)
-
...Cardinal Merry del Val ...Father Henri Le Floch
You included some good ones!
-
I do agree that the Palmar consecrations are a significant mark against him, along with conditionally consecrating at least one Old Catholic bishop. But given that Archbishop Thuc consecrated Michel-Louis Guérard des Lauriers and Moises Carmona, which has bore bountiful fruit in preserving the Mass, providing the sacraments globally, and ensuring the continuation of the priesthood and the episcopacy, I think the good outweighs the bad in this situation. I pray that God has mercy on him for his missteps.
Speaking of Bishop Carmona, Bishop Pivarunas once wrote that his body was found uncorrupted. I'd have to dig to find it.
-
You included some good ones!
Thanks! :popcorn:
-
Speaking of Bishop Carmona, Bishop Pivarunas once wrote that his body was found uncorrupted. I'd have to dig to find it.
Oo! Really? I would love to hear more about this! :cowboy:
Wait... Dig up the body or the information? :laugh1: ;)
-
Wait... Dig up the body or the information? :laugh1: ;)
You beat me to it.
-
Wait... Dig up the body or the information? :laugh1: ;)
his body was found uncorrupted. I'd have to dig to find it.
I could picture this being made into a pun meme. :laugh1:
-
Speaking of Bishop Carmona, Bishop Pivarunas once wrote that his body was found uncorrupted. I'd have to dig to find it.
:laugh1:
-
Speaking of Bishop Carmona, Bishop Pivarunas once wrote that his body was found uncorrupted. I'd have to dig to find it.
I remember seeing that. It was mentioned in one of the editions of Adsum (https://www.materdeiseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/October-Adsum.pdf). Bishop Carmona was certainly a very holy priest and bishop. The CMRI priest that I go to for Masses told us that Bishop Carmona would offer four Masses during the day (can't recall if it was everyday or just Sundays, but nevertheless four public Masses in a single day is incredible dedication)! I should have asked Bishop Pivarunas more about Bishop Carmona back when I met him after my confirmation this past September.
And I don't know if you intended to make that pun, but it's perfect :laugh1:
-
Father Lasance
(Author of the Catholic Girls Guide)
Father Lasance is an excellent choice! He wrote many great books, including the male equivalent for the Catholic Girls Guide in the form of The Young Man's Guide. My confirmation sponsor gifted my brother and I that book. I still need to finish reading through it and my massive backlog of Catholic books that grows every time I visit a church's bookstore.
-
I remember seeing that. It was mentioned in one of the editions of Adsum (https://www.materdeiseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/October-Adsum.pdf). Bishop Carmona was certainly a very holy priest and bishop. The CMRI priest that I go to for Masses told us that Bishop Carmona would offer four Masses during the day (can't recall if it was everyday or just Sundays, but nevertheless four public Masses in a single day is incredible dedication)! I should have asked Bishop Pivarunas more about Bishop Carmona back when I met him after my confirmation this past September.
And I don't know if you intended to make that pun, but it's perfect :laugh1:
Thanks for digging that up! No, I did not purposely make a pun. Bummer....because it is funny. :laugh1:
-
#1 Father Joseph Collins... Requiescat in Pace! :pray:
I could certainly get on board with this, but I suspect I'm too emotionally connected to him.
-
I get it, but canonization requires not just good theology but also heroic sanctity, so one would have to look into his personal life very deeply, obtain the necessary miracles, etc. ... perhaps you could start by asking his intercession for some miraculous cause.
Of course, it's quite clear that this is precisely what the Conciliar Church has done, use canonization for political reasons. As even Michael Matt admitted, Roncalli and Montini were not canonized on account of heroic virtue and sanctity but because they were attempting to endorse and "canonize", as it were, Vatican II itself.
But I guess it would be true of all these suggestions, where we add "... assuming that an investigation finds personal sanctity and heroic virtue".
Oh Yeah I get that Point Ladislaus, 100% agree, Vatican II was the Self Canonization of the Novus Ordo Popes (I doubt Benedict XVI will be Canonized as he is too "Conservative" for the Novus Ordoites :laugh1:)
-
While I think that he was a good and holy man overall, despite Bishop Kelly's smear campaign, I do think that he's tainted a bit by the Palmar fiasco, and that would have to be investigate
The SSPV vs Thuc thing is another thing, however I do believe giving Apostolic Succession to the Palmarian Church is a Caveat (He is Canonized with Cardinal Ottiviani in the Palmarian Church so that's one thing)
I've Included few Images of Thuc in El Palmar (I Collect Archive Imagery of Traditional Catholic Clerics, Niche Catholic Archives are Interesting to look at tbh)
(https://i.imgur.com/jiAtHXz.png)(https://i.imgur.com/HMalLjf.png)(https://i.imgur.com/K1uMVtw.png)(https://i.imgur.com/pSVOhWi.png)(https://i.imgur.com/aWGs7kF.png)(https://i.imgur.com/GIz3LSt.png)(https://i.imgur.com/H0xBd0f.png)
-
I do believe that +Thuc was a good and holy man, and the good he did to preserve the Faith during this Crisis outweighs his mistakes. It’s just that the Church does sometimes withhold canonization over mistakes of this nature. Of course, anyone can make a mistake. St. Cyprian strongly promoted the notion of rebaptizing heretics that was later condemned as heretical, St. Vincent Ferrer sided with an Antipope, St. Thomas got it wrong about The Immaculate Conception, etc. etc.
-
My withholding of +Thuc's name had less to do with his mistakes and more to do with his ministry not being obviously heroic. +Thuc led a quiet, traumatized life. This by no means precludes him from the beatific vision. But his ministry does not compare to Archbishop Lefebvre's, whose was very active and bold. Lefebvre is a much more obvious candidate for canonization. And canonized saints really should be obvious.
For similar reasons, I did not name any of my favorite theologians (although I appreciate that others have!). They were brilliant, but I am not aware of heroic virtue on their part. That may just be my own ignorance.
Savonarola (who I said I'd take a good hard look at--not that I'd spontaneously canonize) is a figure similar to Joan of Arc (executed while excommunicated; both had very powerful political enemies in the Church). I know his theology has come under criticism, and I am not learned enough to confidently die on a hill in his defense. But he's worth a very serious look.
-
My withholding of +Thuc's name had less to do with his mistakes and more to do with his ministry not being obviously heroic. +Thuc led a quiet, traumatized life. This by no means precludes him from the beatific vision. But his ministry does not compare to Archbishop Lefebvre's, whose was very active and bold. Lefebvre is a much more obvious candidate for canonization. And canonized saints really should be obvious.
For similar reasons, I did not name any of my favorite theologians (although I appreciate that others have!). They were brilliant, but I am not aware of heroic virtue on their part. That may just be my own ignorance.
Savonarola (who I said I'd take a good hard look at--not that I'd spontaneously canonize) is a figure similar to Joan of Arc (executed while excommunicated; both had very powerful political enemies in the Church). I know his theology has come under criticism, and I am not learned enough to confidently die on a hill in his defense. But he's worth a very serious look.
I second your point, The Candidate ought to be an obvious choice.
There is an article on the Canonization of Savonarola, apparently Internal Jesuit and Dominican "Beef" over it
https://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/1999a/012299/012299g.htm (https://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/1999a/012299/012299g.htm)
-
I don’t think someone has to be a super public figure to be heroic, and his contribution to preserving the Faith and Sacraments for the faithful cannot be understated.
+Thuc was basically booted from the Vatican, unable to return to Vietnam after the execution of his family by the Communists and had no resources and few connections to do anything. When Father Noel Barbara found him, he was living in a tiny and dirty little room that three people could not sit down in without the Archbishop having to sit on his bed, hearing Confessions to pay for his upkeep. What a horrible disgrace that an Archbishop was reduced to this! But the point is that he did not have the same means as +Lefebvre to do something.
On top of that, +Lefebvre wasn’t going to do much either ... until those first prospective seminarians approached him and persuaded him to start a seminary.
-
I do believe that +Thuc was a good and holy man, and the good he did to preserve the Faith during this Crisis outweighs his mistakes. It’s just that the Church does sometimes withhold canonization over mistakes of this nature. Of course, anyone can make a mistake. St. Cyprian strongly promoted the notion of rebaptizing heretics that was later condemned as heretical, St. Vincent Ferrer sided with an Antipope, St. Thomas got it wrong about The Immaculate Conception, etc. etc.
I cannot really judge a person for their "Holiness" especially a "Traditional" Prelate like Abp Thuc (He had a tough Life Post V2, He was abandoned by the Church after V2) however if i was to play devils advocate here, Abp Thuc's Involvement with El Palmar was on a different level, The only reason why he Consecrated Anti Pope Clemente Gregory XVII was because he told Archbishop Thuc he believed he was the successor to Paul VI and he needed Apostolic Succession to continue his Carmelite Order Church (Total Schism), Abp Thuc while not off the whim consecrating Clemente was only Inclined afterwards due to believing Clemente was holding the baby Jesus and made Abp Thuc hold baby Jesus(I believe there is a Movie about this exact same scene aswell). The Point being this mistake is possibly too much of a big one.
-
I don’t think someone has to be a super public figure to be heroic, and his contribution to preserving the Faith and Sacraments for the faithful cannot be understated.
+Thuc was basically booted from the Vatican, unable to return to Vietnam after the execution of his family by the Communists and had no resources and few connections to do anything. When Father Noel Barbara found him, he was living in a tiny and dirty little room that three people could not sit down in without the Archbishop having to sit on his bed, hearing Confessions to pay for his upkeep. What a horrible disgrace that an Archbishop was reduced to this! But the point is that he did not have the same means as +Lefebvre to do something.
On top of that, +Lefebvre wasn’t going to do much either ... until those first prospective seminarians approached him and persuaded him to start a seminary.
Thank you.
-
I don’t think someone has to be a super public figure to be heroic, and his contribution to preserving the Faith and Sacraments for the faithful cannot be understated.
+Thuc was basically booted from the Vatican, unable to return to Vietnam after the execution of his family by the Communists and had no resources and few connections to do anything. When Father Noel Barbara found him, he was living in a tiny and dirty little room that three people could not sit down in without the Archbishop having to sit on his bed, hearing Confessions to pay for his upkeep. What a horrible disgrace that an Archbishop was reduced to this! But the point is that he did not have the same means as +Lefebvre to do something.
On top of that, +Lefebvre wasn’t going to do much either ... until those first prospective seminarians approached him and persuaded him to start a seminary.
So.... Are you saying that being persecuted by the Conciliar sect disqualifies one from sainthood or are you refuting Mithrandylan?
-
So.... Are you saying that being persecuted by the Conciliar sect disqualifies one from sainthood or are you refuting Mithrandylan?
I took his post as refuting Mithrandylan.
-
I cannot really judge a person for their "Holiness" especially a "Traditional" Prelate like Abp Thuc (He had a tough Life Post V2, He was abandoned by the Church after V2) however if i was to play devils advocate here, Abp Thuc's Involvement with El Palmar was on a different level, The only reason why he Consecrated Anti Pope Clemente Gregory XVII was because he told Archbishop Thuc he believed he was the successor to Paul VI and he needed Apostolic Succession to continue his Carmelite Order Church (Total Schism), Abp Thuc while not off the whim consecrating Clemente was only Inclined afterwards due to believing Clemente was holding the baby Jesus and made Abp Thuc hold baby Jesus(I believe there is a Movie about this exact same scene aswell). The Point being this mistake is possibly too much of a big one.
I tend to think that the true Church hierarchy would take the huge Crisis in the Church at the time into account when determining what mistake is "too much of a big one".
-
... [t]he only reason why he Consecrated Anti Pope Clemente Gregory XVII was because he told Archbishop Thuc he believed he was the successor to Paul VI ...
This is incorrect. Clemente did not claim to be be pope, successor to Paul VI, until about a year after +Thuc consecrated him a bishop. Once that happened, +Thuc rejected the Palmar group and distanced himself from them. This is one source of the disinfo / propaganda against him that he withheld his intention when consecrating these guys. He didn't say that, just that he disavowed or rejected the movement / group after Clemente declared himself Pope.
-
(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/124/078/703/original/db8d79841edcb5f4.png)
-
So.... Are you saying that being persecuted by the Conciliar sect disqualifies one from sainthood or are you refuting Mithrandylan?
I was disagreeing with Mith's statement that +Thuc isn't worthy of being considered for canonization because he didn't take a high-profile public stand against the Conciliar Church. I was saying that he didn't really have the resources to do so, having been exiled and relegated to a state of abject poverty, unknown and nearly forgotten, playing the part of a simple associate pastor. I also said that the contrast with +Lefebvre is unfair, as +Lefebvre wasn't about to make the big move of founding his Society had it not been for those seminarians who had to persuade him to do so.
-
I'm not arguing that +Thuc didn't do everything he could (I think he did). I'm just saying that saints aren't canonized on a curve. His lack of resources is irrelevant to the question of canonization and heroic virtue. That is a really high bar.
.
As far as ABL being convinced by others, I don't see how that detracts. Pope St Felix was convinced to take the papacy by Arians. St Joseph Cupertino had to be convinced to take the priesthood (famously nicknamed, 'The Reluctant Saint'). Providence arranges the right resources and supporters for God's most favored.
-
I took his post as refuting Mithrandylan.
Yes. Sorry, I should have quoted him when posting my response. I was disagreeing with Mith about his not having been public enough in opposing Vatican II.
Archbishop Thuc was a good and holy man, and I do believe he will be canonized.
People who doubt this or who have been conditioned by the slanderous attacks from SSPV, and Bishop Kelly in particular, need to read +Thuc's Autobiography.
I've read as much as I could find available in English online, and it reads like St. Therese's Story of Soul. Archbishop Thuc exhibited a breath-taking humility. He was an Archbishop, had received a "Mandate" from Rome, earned a couple of advanced degrees, founded and taught at a seminary, could speak multiple languages, belonged to a noble / elite family in Vietnam (his brother was President of Vietnam), and not once did he ever complain about having been reduced to the state in which Father Barbara found him, living in a tiny and filthy little room with some cats and an altar set up to offer Traditional Mass. This man should have been offering Mass at a cathedral, sitting on an episcopal throne, and preaching to thousands. Instead he was reduced to what amounted to an associate pastor in an obscure little village, earning his meager existence by hearing Confessions. And he never complained. In fact, he was grateful to the bishop who set him up with that opportunity in that it allowed him to earn his keep.
Another facet of his Autobiography that's ignored by his slanderers is that, having been written after the main consecrations, of +Guerard des Lauriers and +Carmona/+Zamora, it showed that he still had an extremely sharp mind, recalling minutes and obscure details decades after the fact ... and just in its style. This was not a man who was so far gone that he didn't possess the very tiny minimum intellectual capacity required to validly confer Sacraments, i.e. to know what he was doing ("I am consecrating a bishop.") and to intend to do it (shown by simply performing the complex ceremony of the Church). He was fluent in Latin, having obtained advanced degrees in Rome, and absolutely presumed by the Church to have validly consecrated. Add to that Bishop Castro de Mayer who told The Nine when they went to him seeking consecration that they should go see Guerard. When The Nine objected to this, citing their concerns about validity, Bishop de Mayer responded that if anyone was competent to know whether a Sacrament was valid, it would be Guerard (considered arguably THE top theologian in the Church just before Vatican II). That comment was in fact what prompted Father Cekada to re-evaluate his position regarding the +Thuc line.
Bishop +Thuc also reminds me of Bishop Vida Elmer. When I once visited him, he invited me over to his modest little rectory, and insisted that I sit down while he cooked me a humble breakfast of eggs and toast. That made me uncomfortable to watch a bishop cooking me breakfast while I sat there, reminiscent of how Our Lord washed the Apostles' feet. And I think many of these Independent heroes will also be considered for canonization ... having kept the faith and served the faithful in this greatest crisis in all of Church history. So I am deeply pained by the slanders of SSPV, especially Bishop Kelly, against Archbishop Thuc. And they are in fact nothing short of slanders ... and could very likely results in his cause being passed over. If the Church later canonized +Thuc, Bishop Kelly might once again become a sedevacantist.
-
I'm not arguing that +Thuc didn't do everything he could (I think he did). I'm just saying that saints aren't canonized on a curve. His lack of resources is irrelevant to the question of canonization and heroic virtue. That is a really high bar.
.
As far as ABL being convinced by others, I don't see how that detracts. Pope St Felix was convinced to take the papacy by Arians. St Joseph Cupertino had to be convinced to take the priesthood (famously nicknamed, 'The Reluctant Saint'). Providence arranges the right resources and supporters for God's most favored.
That's precisely what you were arguing when I responded it.
It's a double standard, saying that one man is a saint because God's Providence placed him in one situation, while another is not because he was in a different one. Read Archbishop Thuc's autobiography and get back to us. There's no curve, and it seems like you're simply assuming that +Thuc lacked heroic virtue.
-
But [+Thuc's] ministry does not compare to Archbishop Lefebvre's, whose was very active and bold. Lefebvre is a much more obvious candidate for canonization. And canonized saints really should be obvious.
To remind you of what you were arguing, despite your denying it later. Ah, OK, so his ministry wasn't "active and bold", whatever that means in terms of assessing sanctity. That's a nonsensical made-up criterion. Canonizations aren't political statements, as the Novus Ordo has turned them into. What's at issue is what he did, and how he did it, given the circuмstances that Divine Providence put him in. Many saints were obscure and unknown until their canonization.
Bishop de Castro Mayer did not go onto the world stage to battle the Conciliar Church either. He just did his thing in his diocese, where Divine Providence put him, and yet he's no less worthy to be considered than +Lefebvre ... who, again, barring Divine Providence sending those seminarians his way, likely would have just retired in relative obscurity. What's at issue is their RESPONSE to Divine Providence, and not the circuмstances into which God put them.
It's also highly likely that +Thuc died a martyr. He was kidnapped from a group of Traditional Catholics and, despite having been known to be in good health, died shortly thereafter.
-
To remind you of what you were arguing, despite your denying it later. Ah, OK, so his ministry wasn't "active and bold", whatever that means in terms of assessing sanctity. That's a nonsensical made-up criterion. Canonizations aren't political statements, as the Novus Ordo has turned them into. What's at issue is what he did, and how he did it, given the circuмstances that Divine Providence put him in. Many saints were obscure and unknown until their canonization.
Bishop de Castro Mayer did not go onto the world stage to battle the Conciliar Church either. He just did his thing in his diocese, where Divine Providence put him, and yet he's no less worthy to be considered than +Lefebvre ... who, again, barring Divine Providence sending those seminarians his way, likely would have just retired in relative obscurity.
It's also highly likely that +Thuc died a martyr. He was kidnapped from a group of Traditional Catholics and, despite having been known to be in good health, died shortly thereafter.
Yes, I have read the story from the priest that accompanied him. I can't recall his name right off.
-
It's also highly likely that +Thuc died a martyr. He was kidnapped from a group of Traditional Catholics and, despite having been known to be in good health, died shortly thereafter.
Do you recall what group of traditional Catholics kidnapped him? That's a terrible thing for them to do.
-
Yes, I have read the story from the priest that accompanied him. I can't recall his name right off.
And their motivation was clear, as shortly after they kidnapped +Thuc, they released this alleged letter from him denouncing Traditional Catholicism ... but which bore no signature, and then the Archbishop was dead soon after its "release".
-
Do you recall what group of traditional Catholics kidnapped him? That's a terrible thing for them to do.
Sorry if I was unclear. He was kidnapped FROM a group of Traditional Catholics (Bishop Vizelis' group, with whom he was living) but abducted BY a group of Conciliar Vietnamese.
-
Sorry if I was unclear. He was kidnapped FROM a group of Traditional Catholics (Bishop Vizelis' group, with whom he was living) but abducted BY a group of Conciliar Vietnamese.
Thanks for the clarification.
-
And their motivation was clear, as shortly after they kidnapped +Thuc, they released this alleged letter from him denouncing Traditional Catholicism ... but which bore no signature, and then the Archbishop was dead soon after its "release".
I don't know much about +Thuc, but I'm sorry to hear that this happened to him. Maybe this shows how difficult things could be back then. If he can be cut some slack, given what he endured, then perhaps others can be too (like +ABL). I'd be interested in reading his autobiography. He does sound like a good and humble man, even though he made mistakes.
-
It's also highly likely that +Thuc died a martyr. He was kidnapped from a group of Traditional Catholics and, despite having been known to be in good health, died shortly thereafter.
.
I believe this too. While in captivity, Bp. Thuc managed to get to a telephone and call Fr. Francis Miller, the priest who was taking care of him when he was kidnapped. He told Fr. Miller that his captors were trying to get him to sign a retraction of his ordinations, but he refused to sign. He died within a year of his kidnapping. I believe those heretics kidnapped and murdered him to prevent him from consecrating any more bishops for traditional Catholics, which make him a martyr.
-
.
I believe this too. While in captivity, Bp. Thuc managed to get to a telephone and call Fr. Francis Miller, the priest who was taking care of him when he was kidnapped. He told Fr. Miller that his captors were trying to get him to sign a retraction of his ordinations, but he refused to sign. He died within a year of his kidnapping. I believe those heretics kidnapped and murdered him to prevent him from consecrating any more bishops for traditional Catholics, which make him a martyr.
Clearly no heroic virtue. ::)
-
To answer the question of this thread, I would say nobody. I think it's a bad inclination for people to think they know who is deserving of such a thing. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
If you read Fr. Faber's book on canonization (https://archive.org/details/AnEssayOnBeatificationCanonization/mode/2up), and you see how carefully and how delicately the Church examines the thoughts, motives, actions, omissions of everyone who she considers canonizing, you see that there is much, much more involved in the canonization process than anyone alive today has any inkling of. To say, "This person seems really holy to me, I think he should be canonized!" betrays an enormous amount of ignorance about the subject as a whole, and I think if people would read a little bit from Fr. Faber's book, they would realize how difficult and delicate the canonization process really is.
Just to give one tiny example from the book, speaking about the canonization of cardinals:
In the causes of cardinals special attention is paid to their obedience, frugality, residence, care of their titular Church, sincerity and boldness in counselling the pope, and cheerful submission when he has decreed contrary to their advice. Thus Baronius, when cardinal, lived as plainly as when he was a simple Oratorian; and the same may be said of the frugality and modesty of the Venerable Bellarmine and the B. Tommasi. Cardinal Bessarion affords an illustrious example of freedom in counselling the pope, and every one will remember the well-known courage of St. Pius V. when he was cardinal. But it was actually a matter to be considered by the Congregation whether the Venerable Cardinal Ximenes had not offended by excess from his having once said, perhaps in joke, that the pope ought to have a "bit of a frightening” now and then. The conduct of cardinals in their legations is also a subject of most jealous scrutiny when their causes come before the Congregation.
So if you are a cardinal, you have to tread an incredibly thin line between admonishing the pope and still being obedient to him, and the Ven. Cardinal Ximenes had his canonization imperiled by simply making a little joke about this.
-
Article on Archbishop Thus I never saw before by a Fr. Byman:
http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=745
-
To answer the question of this thread, I would say nobody. I think it's a bad inclination for people to think they know who is deserving of such a thing. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
If you read Fr. Faber's book on canonization (https://archive.org/details/AnEssayOnBeatificationCanonization/mode/2up), and you see how carefully and how delicately the Church examines examined the thoughts, motives, actions, omissions of everyone who she considers canonizing, you see that there is much, much more involved in the canonization process than anyone alive today has any inkling of. To say, "This person seems really holy to me, I think he should be canonized!" betrays an enormous amount of ignorance about the subject as a whole, and I think if people would read a little bit from Fr. Faber's book, they would realize how difficult and delicate the canonization process really is was.
-
To answer the question of this thread, I would say nobody. I think it's a bad inclination for people to think they know who is deserving of such a thing. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
If you read Fr. Faber's book on canonization (https://archive.org/details/AnEssayOnBeatificationCanonization/mode/2up), and you see how carefully and how delicately the Church examines the thoughts, motives, actions, omissions of everyone who she considers canonizing, you see that there is much, much more involved in the canonization process than anyone alive today has any inkling of. To say, "This person seems really holy to me, I think he should be canonized!" betrays an enormous amount of ignorance about the subject as a whole, and I think if people would read a little bit from Fr. Faber's book, they would realize how difficult and delicate the canonization process really is.
Of course. But the OP did say this was meant as a hypothetical. I would think that every single one of us knows that our opinion on this matter is just that, and that the Church is the only one to make such a conclusion. Not to mention needed miracles and all that.
-
Just another excerpt to give you a faint idea, but the whole book is like this:
Even the circuмstances of the death-bed are always jealously examined, as if it were the touchstone of final perseverance. Sudden deaths may sometimes impede the advancement of a cause, as rendering the proof of final perseverance incomplete; then indirect and proximate evidence is carefully looked for, as in the case of St. Andrew Avellino and the B. Colette; or miracles immediately afterwards, as in the case of the B. Jordan, the general of the Dominicans. Scacchus tells us that the words with which the dying servants of God recommend their soul to Him must be weighed. When Benedict XIV. was promoter of the faith he objected to the words a servant of God had used on his death-bed about utter trust in God, seeming to exclude the notion of good works and to contravene the decisions of Trent. In like manner objection was taken to Cardinal Paul Buralis of Arezzo having administered the Viaticuм to himself with his own hand, when It was brought him — a singularity contrary to the custom of the modem Church. But Cardinal de Lugo shows that the consent of the priest who brought the Blessed Sacrament excludes all fault in the matter. St. Dominic mentioned things to his own praise on his death-bed, whereas St. John of the Cross would not allow such things to be named in his presence. St. Martin and St. Thomas of Villanova were willing their lives should be prolonged for the good of others; St. Philip Neri and St. Francis of Sales quite rejected the idea. St. Francesca Romans was noted for having a death-bed without temptations, whereas other saints have died overclouded, as it were, with the shadow of God’s judgments, while St. Romuald, St. John of God, and St. Cassian of Nami, died without witness of man...
-
Sorry if I was unclear. He was kidnapped FROM a group of Traditional Catholics (Bishop Vizelis' group, with whom he was living) but abducted BY a group of Conciliar Vietnamese.
He's a great video about Archbishop Thuc's time in Rochester and then his kidnapping ... a firsthand account by Father Francis Miller, who was there and saw it all. That Tran guy, BTW, had known ties to the Vietnamese military.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQqs76r2d2o
-
I don't know much about +Thuc, but I'm sorry to hear that this happened to him. Maybe this shows how difficult things could be back then. If he can be cut some slack, given what he endured, then perhaps others can be too (like +ABL). I'd be interested in reading his autobiography. He does sound like a good and humble man, even though he made mistakes.
Here's the one copy of his autobiography that I could find. Unfortunately, it ends abruptly and we don't have the entire thing there.
http://www.einsicht-aktuell.de/index.php?svar=2&ausgabe_id=180&artikel_id=1920
-
To answer the question of this thread, I would say nobody. I think it's a bad inclination for people to think they know who is deserving of such a thing. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
Sure, Yeti. I posted this thought earlier, and I think we all know that we're just "shooting the breeze" here among ourselves.
-
Here's the one copy of his autobiography that I could find. Unfortunately, it ends abruptly and we don't have the entire thing there.
http://www.einsicht-aktuell.de/index.php?svar=2&ausgabe_id=180&artikel_id=1920
Thanks. I read it, and watch the video too.
-
So, I had mentioned that his autobiography reads like that of St. Therese. I wasn't aware of the connection between him and St. Therese until I listened to the earlier part of Father Miller's talk about Archbishop Thuc.
-
Here's the one copy of his autobiography that I could find. Unfortunately, it ends abruptly and we don't have the entire thing there.
http://www.einsicht-aktuell.de/index.php?svar=2&ausgabe_id=180&artikel_id=1920
.
Thank you for posting this! I knew this book existed in French and German, but I wasn't aware it existed in English. Maybe the whole thing hasn't been translated yet?
Very interesting reminiscences about Vatican II. This is a pretty amazing statement:
My few interventions had the goal of defending Christ’s church against the modernistic attacks, against the disparagement of the church by a well organized modernistic party under the leadership of Suenens and other prelates like Marty, the current Cardinal Archbishop of Paris. I must also add that the majority of the council fathers, particularly those from North America, did not understand Latin well, the official and binding language of the council. They spent the bulk of the council debates in both cafes set up in St. Peter, where they drank coffee or Coca Cola. They only returned at the time of the vote in the council auditorium without properly knowing what they were voting about.
They voted randomly, once with YES, once with NO (for a change they said), and these votes were officially "inspired by the Holy Spirit" and were counted up to make up the "majority." I saw other Fathers—very few—, that did the call on the Holy Spirit—not in the cafes but rather prayed the rosary at their seats and asked their neighbours for advice about the vote!
:facepalm:
-
Of course. But the OP did say this was meant as a hypothetical. I would think that every single one of us knows that our opinion on this matter is just that, and that the Church is the only one to make such a conclusion. Not to mention needed miracles and all that.
Precisely! I know the choices I gave for canonization would, realistically, have a near zero chance of being canonized by the Church (and perhaps rightly so given that both were involved in some controversies). I merely proposed them as candidates that I would like to see canonized.
-
.
Thank you for posting this! I knew this book existed in French and German, but I wasn't aware it existed in English. Maybe the whole thing hasn't been translated yet?
Very interesting reminiscences about Vatican II. This is a pretty amazing statement:
:facepalm:
I had heard those statements confirmed elsewhere, that many prelates would hang out at a place called "Bar Jonah" (play on words); they didn't seem to really care about the Council.
EDIT: looked it up and this was reported by Xavier Rynne (aka Father Francis X Murphy). Evidently there was another one called "Bar Abbas". Indeed, these bishops were deliberately abandoning Our Lord and the Church for Barabbas.
Evidently the ostensible reason they gave for setting up these "cafes" was because so many bishops smoked, that they were concerned about the hall being filled with smoke.
-
Evidently there was another one called "Bar Abbas". Indeed, these bishops were deliberately abandoning Our Lord and the Church for Barabbas.
.
What? Are you serious? This sounds like some sort of joke. :facepalm:
-
.
What? Are you serious? This sounds like some sort of joke. :facepalm:
According to a very liberal website (Focus News) this was indeed the case. In a piece honoring a liberal nun, the article says recalling the Council:
When the male auditors arrived for session two, they mingled effortlessly with prelates and priests at the two coffee bars, known as "Bar-Jonah" and "Bar-Abbas." But this did not hold true when the female auditors arrived during session three. Having women in such close proximity was too much for many bishops and, so to relieve their uneasiness, a separate coffee bar for the women was created. Chagrined by this attempt, the women called their segregated area, "Bar-Nun" or "Bar-None." José and Luz-Marie Alvarez-Icaza and others protested this arrangement and more than a few churchmen cross over the artificial barrier to the exhange ideas with the women.
Source: Link (https://www.futurechurchnews.org/article/in-honor-of-sr-carmel-mcenroy-the-women-of-vatican-ii-and-now)
And another source from the National Catholic Reporter:
Women also inspired a bit of conciliar doggerel. As is well known, the popular coffee bars during breaks at the council had been dubbed “Bar Jonah” and “Bar Abbas.” Orsuto explained that a third bar was opened to accomdate the auditors, and because several were women, wags took to calling it “Bar Nun.”
Source: Link (https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/remembering-women-vatican-ii)
-
Father Solanus Casey
Biography | Father Solanus Guild (https://solanuscasey.org/who-is-father-solanus/biography)
Berthe Petit
The Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary: The Revelations of Berthe Petit (https://www.motherofallpeoples.com/post/the-sorrowful-and-immaculate-heart-of-mary-the-revelations-of-berthe-petit)
-
My great aunt Lena Cherysczminsky.
-
Father Emil Kapaun
-
Fr. Leo McNamara, The Holy Levite, The American Padre Pio, and GOD's Anon Knight.
-
Father Emil Kapaun
Good one!
-
Eileen Rosaline O'Connor
https://eileenoconnor.com.au/eileens-story
-
Eileen Rosaline O'Connor
https://eileenoconnor.com.au/eileens-story
Never heard of her! Thank you for this info, Nadir
-
As a child I watched her sisters in those elegant brown habits with their little pill box bonnets and veils walking in our streets, going to visit and nurse the sick and dying poor. Sadly they relinquished the habit for skirt and blouse and they are aged.
-
Fr. James Francis Wathen
Orestes Augustus Brownson
:incense:
-
Mary Ann Long
https://www.tfp.org/the-hidden-life-of-mary-ann-long/ (https://www.tfp.org/the-hidden-life-of-mary-ann-long/)
:incense:
-
Fr. James Francis Wathen
Orestes Augustus Brownson
:incense:
I haven't looked to closely into this but this thread docuмents some occult/gnostic connections with Wathen.
Scroll up and scroll down to see full thread:
https://twitter.com/2022moshiachnow/status/1606359659366862848
-
I haven't looked to closely into this but this thread docuмents some occult/gnostic connections with Wathen.
Scroll up and scroll down to see full thread:
https://twitter.com/2022moshiachnow/status/1606359659366862848
In Who Shall Ascend? Fr. Wathen writes: "We are aware that the Order is hated by certain Traditionalist priests, due to which fact they have been moved to write and speak against us. We can find no other explanation for this behavior than envy."
Whoever this 2022moshiachnow fellow is I would write him off as someone with a grudge against Fr. Wathen, likely because Fr. always defended the True Mass and dogmas of the Church - and did not cease to preach that it was a mortal sin to attend the evil thing for any reason.
Upthumb for rosarytrad - great choices!
-
I haven't looked to closely into this but this thread docuмents some occult/gnostic connections with Wathen.
Scroll up and scroll down to see full thread:
https://twitter.com/2022moshiachnow/status/1606359659366862848
While I don't see eye to eye with Father Wathen on a number of things, the logic in this is rather weak, just a stream of consciousness.
Peter II of Yugoslavia granted royal protection to Templars, OSJ, and Order of the Crown of Thorns. Leader of Templars was a bad guy. Lists stuff bad guy did. I haven't looked at what Father Cekada wrote, but of course Father C was an enemy of EENS dogma.
-
I haven't looked to closely into this but this thread docuмents some occult/gnostic connections with Wathen.
Scroll up and scroll down to see full thread:
https://twitter.com/2022moshiachnow/status/1606359659366862848
I've listened to Fr. Cekada's interview on OSJ from the True Restoration podcast and he explained the basic history of OSJ, and he briefly mentioned Fr. Wathen and Fr. DePauw but he didn't blast them or anything like that.
I'm friends with people who personally knew Fr. Wathen, and while I'm aware that there are/were problems with OSJ, I don't know the full story of his membership to that order. I do know he was a solid Catholic and was extremely anti-Masonic.
There are other members on this forum who I know can elucidate this situation. Maybe even consider starting another thread for this particular topic? Put it to rest once and for all?
My pick for him to be canonized is biased because I go to the chapel where he said mass. I'm reaping the rewards of his labor and "by their fruits you shall know them." From all that I've heard of him including stories, sermons, and reading his books he seems to have been a holy priest, and good friend.
"[1] Out of the depths I have cried to thee, O Lord: [2] Lord, hear my voice. Let thy ears be attentive to the voice of my supplication. [3] If thou, O Lord, wilt mark iniquities: Lord, who shall stand it. [4] For with thee there is merciful forgiveness: and by reason of thy law, I have waited for thee, O Lord. My soul hath relied on his word: [5] My soul hath hoped in the Lord. [6] From the morning watch even until night, let Israel hope in the Lord. [7] Because with the Lord there is mercy: and with him plentiful redemption. [8] And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities."
[Psalms 129:1-8]