Sainthood discrepancies? Constantine?

[Aramis]

Originally Posted by mardukm

Dear Baron,


I mean that a bishop has the authority to establish that a particular person is a saint and worthy to be venerated for his local diocese (and not for anywhere else).

That is DEFINITELY NOT how it is handled by the Roman church.

Originally Posted by CIC

Can. 1186 To foster the sanctification of the people of God, the Church commends to the special and filial reverence of the Christian faithful the Blessed Mary ever Virgin, Mother of God, whom Christ established as the mother of all people, and promotes the true and authentic veneration of the other saints whose example instructs the Christian faithful and whose intercession sustains them.

Can. 1187 It is permitted to reverence through public veneration only those servants of God whom the authority of the Church has recorded in the list of the saints or the blessed.

Can. 1188 The practice of displaying sacred images in churches for the reverence of the faithful is to remain in effect. Nevertheless, they are to be exhibited in moderate number and in suitable order so that the Christian people are not confused nor occasion given for inappropriate devotion.

THere is a very rigid Roman process for beattification and sainthood.

[BluesPicker]

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

I found Constantine the Great and his mother Helena listed as Saints at www.Catholic.org.

For myself I heed the Words of Christ that urged one to judge as one would be judged. So to me this means to hold myself to the very strictest moral and ethical conduct before God and Man while holding others in a forgiving and loving manner that reflects, hopefully, the Life and Teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ.

[mardukm]

Dear brother Aramis,

Originally Posted by Aramis

That is DEFINITELY NOT how it is handled by the Roman church.

THere is a very rigid Roman process for beattification and sainthood.

With all due respect, only PUBLIC veneration is required to have direct papal approval. What I am saying is that if persons wish to venerate a person, they should ask permission from their bishop to do so and not take it upon themselves to determine it. And the bishop has the authority to grant that permission.

Besides, the notion of public veneration does not refer to the mere veneration of a person, even by a large group of people. It actually refers to liturgical exomologesis.

So I cannot see why a whole segment of the Church cannot venerate or recognize a person as a saint, as long as he/she is not included in the liturgical litanies and the like.

Blessings,
Marduk

[Woodstock]

Originally Posted by Aramis

That is DEFINITELY NOT how it is handled by the Roman church.

That's definitely how the Roman Church handles whether or not apparitions are worthy of belief. The bishop of the area has the final say in the matter and the Vatican can only elevate an approved apparition to the status of being worthy of veneration for the entire Church, not override him.

I know a lot of Roman Catholics who are surprised to find out that bishops have responsibilities the Vatican doesn't or that each bishop is considered head of a local church in the west, too. I attended a Latin bishop's installment and I remember the letter from the Vatican saying just that, but still people have this image of "pope is to bishop as bishop is to priest." It isn't so, not even in the Roman Church.

[BaronGrackle]

Originally Posted by Woodstock

That's definitely how the Roman Church handles whether or not apparitions are worthy of belief. The bishop of the area has the final say in the matter and the Vatican can only elevate an approved apparition to the status of being worthy of veneration for the entire Church, not override him.

I know a lot of Roman Catholics who are surprised to find out that bishops have responsibilities the Vatican doesn't or that each bishop is considered head of a local church in the west, too. I attended a Latin bishop's installment and I remember the letter from the Vatican saying just that, but still people have this image of "pope is to bishop as bishop is to priest." It isn't so, not even in the Roman Church.

I certainly am surprised. I was going to look up the Bayside apparitions as a counterexample to show a case where the Vatican clearly denounced a private revelation, but it seems that the local bishop was most involved in denouncing those. Learn something new every day. I think I like it.

[mardukm]

Originally Posted by Woodstock

That's definitely how the Roman Church handles whether or not apparitions are worthy of belief. The bishop of the area has the final say in the matter and the Vatican can only elevate an approved apparition to the status of being worthy of veneration for the entire Church, not override him.

I know a lot of Roman Catholics who are surprised to find out that bishops have responsibilities the Vatican doesn't or that each bishop is considered head of a local church in the west, too. I attended a Latin bishop's installment and I remember the letter from the Vatican saying just that, but still people have this image of "pope is to bishop as bishop is to priest." It isn't so, not even in the Roman Church.

VERY WELL PUT, brother Woodstock.

I can just hear Latin controversialists cry out: "You Eastern and Oriental Catholics are just a step away from heresy and schism!"


It seems like any insistence on our part that bishops actually have prerogatives independant of the papacy garners such a reaction.

Blessings,
Marduk
.

[Aramis]

Originally Posted by Woodstock

That's definitely how the Roman Church handles whether or not apparitions are worthy of belief. The bishop of the area has the final say in the matter and the Vatican can only elevate an approved apparition to the status of being worthy of veneration for the entire Church, not override him.

I know a lot of Roman Catholics who are surprised to find out that bishops have responsibilities the Vatican doesn't or that each bishop is considered head of a local church in the west, too. I attended a Latin bishop's installment and I remember the letter from the Vatican saying just that, but still people have this image of "pope is to bishop as bishop is to priest." It isn't so, not even in the Roman Church.

Apparitions are not matters of beatification nor canonization.

Until the pope or a council approves them, however, they are never binding.