Commonweal has a discussion of the Vatican’s decision to place Pius XII and John Paul II on the path to canonization.
I share the concerns. Canonization is supposed to provide a role model for Catholics to follow, but how can you imitate even a good pope? For centuries almost all saints have been priests and religious, but only a vanishingly small percentage of Catholics live in those states of life.
Canonization, especially of popes, has become another exercise in clericalism, of which the Church needs far less, not more. It is the ultimate career step.
How can Pius XII’s actions during World War II be judged until the archives are opened? From my tiny bit of research around the fringes, I think he will probably come out OK – he did what little he could to save lives. He made mistakes in dealing with Hitler (who didn’t?), but Pius was not in any way sympathetic to Nazism. What he did not do, and it is a serious matter, was ac against Catholic clerics who were sympathetic to Nazism (see my case study). Pius was a good man in horrifying times. He did better than Allied leaders who turned Jews away. Whether he was heroic – only full study of the documents from 1939 to 1945 might show that, and those are not yet available.
John Paul II, for all his virtues, was a lousy judge of character. His so-called priest friends in the chancery in Cracow betrayed him to the secret police. John Paul II recommended the abuser Maciel as a guide to youth. John Paul II refused personal appeals from a cardinal to make a statement about an abuser. Should a person whose work in the Church is administration and failed so badly in key issues be canonized?
Yes. The Catholic Church does not act in haste. What’s the panic?
As I mentioned in an earlier posting, my own desire would be to see the Church go slow with regards to canonizing JP II.
An essential duty of being pope is to be an administrator, and an essential element of sanctity is excellence (at least willed and sincerely attempted) in the performance of one’s duties for love of God and neighbor, and finally, a key feature of canonization is to provide the faithful with a role-model of lived sanctity. How then could a pope who (in the judgement of many) was a poor administrator be an example for excellence in fidelity to duty?
JP II was duped by Marcial, gave huge support to the cult-like Legionaries of Christ, made the scandalous assignment of Cardinal Law to St. Mary Major, failed to grasp the reality and extent of the scandals, etc., etc. Where does the buck stop in a hierarchical church?
I accept that in some real way, JP II had heroic virtue. But to the full extent needed to be “raised to the altar”? There would appear to be reasons to doubt and to go slow. Real slow.
St. Thomas More was canonized, what, 4 centuries after his death? I’d say in this case the Church is very much acting in haste. I share Mr. Podles concerns as well. Better to wait a century when the drum beaters on both sides are long gone.
It was JPII who approved the rushing of the canonization of Josemaria Escriva, founder of Opus Dei, and arguably most unworthy of canonization.
Years ago I used to read a book on saints to the kids at breakfast. One saint each morning.
It went like this. Here’s this boy. He became a priest and now he’s a saint. Here’s this girl. She became a nun and now she’s a saint. Here’s this boy. He became a bishop and now he’s a saint.
I got sick of it. Where were the plumbers? Where were the farmers? Where were the blacksmiths?
It left the impression that the only way to be a saint was to enter religious life.
JPII tried to change that by urging the canonization of other folk, and for that he should be applauded. But I don’t think he should be canonized.
As you point out, he was not a good judge of character. And — back when I cared about such things — I was very suspicious of his theological innovations, like the way he tried to undo 2000 years of Christian history on the headship of the husband.
GregK, I agree 1,000 percent with you about JPII not being canonized. Another kind of “theological innovation” (aka, revisionist theology) that most Catholics have failed to recognize was his abolitionist view of capital punishment, which also contradicted “2,000 years of Christian history” — and the fundamentals of the OT — on the issue.
If JPII is canonized, it will be the triumph of public relations and a cult of personality over reason and discernment.
Jake — why do you say Josemaria Escriva was unworthy of canonization?
Escriva’s theology of the laity was nothing new, his organization has been a pyramid recruiting and financial scheme involved in multi-level corporate scandals, and he hid out the Civil War in a hospital on the Republican side pretending to be a mental patient. Canonization may be infallible as to the person being in heaven, but not as to anything else – at least that’s Aquinas’ view. I bet my grandma’s in heaven, too, and I would rather pray for her intercession.