After doctors and the commission of theologians okayed the second miracle performed by John Paul II, the commission of theologians has also given its approval. All that remains now is for cardinals and bishops to give the go ahead and Wojtyla could become a saint
I have met a pious Catholic woman who claims John Paul 2 is a liberal Catholic who has harmed the faith and should not be a saint. I was surprised at this, but she is indeed very pious, reads a lot, and is very intelligent so I can’t dismiss this outright? Anyone else agree with her who can explain?
A word to the wise - do not even go there. Listen to the words of Brother JReducation in this post:
Whether or not Bl. John Paul said or did anything that scandalized anyone becomes a mute issue as soon as the reigning pope says that he lived a life of extraordinary virtue and declares him venerable. At that point, the Church is no longer interested in any other opinions, not even the opinions of clergy. The pope has spoken and declared him -]venerable/-] blessed.
Scandal is only a concern for those who claim there is scandal. As far as the Holy See is concerned, there is nothing that it found to be a scandal in the life of John Paul II. Therefore, the Holy See does not feel that need to offer an explanation for something that the Holy See says never happened.
It is against CAF rules to speak negatively about a Pope, so I doubt you’ll get a lot of responses to your inquiry. There are plenty of other websites that opine about the positives and negatives of Pope John Paul II’s pontificate. I would suggest a Google search rather than expect any kind of discussion about it here.
If you want my personal opinion, I don’t think any person should be canonized within 30 years of his/her death, especially that of a Pope. The Pope is the head of the Church, and in order to fully grasp the impact of his pontificate, one should wait at least one generation to see the fruits of that impact before beginning the canonization process. The fastest canonization on record belongs to Josemaria Escriva who became a saint only 27 years after his death. If Pope John Paul II is canonized this year, it would only be 8 years since his death.
As comparison, Pope St. Pius X wasn’t canonized until 40 years after his pontificate by Pope Pius XII. 40 years seems like a reasonable amount of time, IMHO.
Any response to this question will most likely be met with a ban. As I said in my previous post, a simple Google search of PJP2’s pontificate would probably be the best way to find out this information. Another way would be to look at other Catholic forums that do not have the same rules as CAF in place and ask your question there.
I have heard this from several people. What they mean by it is that he did things they didn’t like, that they think they know better than the Pope (what arrogance), and therefore, they do not like him.
This takes the wrong view of canonization, it is not some type of award for having a big impact on the world, or even a popular one. It is a definitive statement by the Church that a person is in Heaven.
The best answer for your friend is to explain that the Church doesn’t make saints. God reveals to us that some people are in heaven, usually through miracles or through the faith of the pope.
In any case, a canonization is a statement whereby the Church publicly proclaims that God has revealed that John Paul II is indeed a saint. The term canonization comes from the word canon or book. The pope orders that his name be inscribed in the book of saints and that the entire Church venerate him as such by assigning a special day in which the liturgy of the Church prays through his intercession.
We have no control over whom God chooses to show his glory. A miracle is a sign of the glory of God. If he performs miracles through John Paul II, who are to tell God that he should not do this, because in our opinion John Paul is not worth it.
You may also want to explain to your friend that God does not evaluate a person’s achievements. There are many great saints who were horrible administrators. My own founder is one of them. I don’t think John Paul II could have been a worse administrator than Francis of Assisi. Yet, God used Francis’ incompetence to save the Church of the Middle Ages. No one realized this for more than 200 years. We will know how John Paul influenced and help the Church in a century or so. Looking back we will have 20/20 vision.
Finally, tell your friend that God’s ruler for sanctity is based on heroic love not achievements. Can she prove that John Paul’s love for God and his Church did not go beyond what is typical for most of us? The Vatican was unable to prove it. Everything pointed in the opposite direction. This was a man who was inflamed with love for God, Church and the world. He was a mystic. Like most mystics, he was very naive at times. It’s one of a mystics most charming qualities.
FYI - I just got back from DC and was able to visit the JPII Cultural museum. I loved it and got some awesome souvenirs. It doesn’t take long to see, but it is worth the stop if anyone visits the National Shrine. Oh, and it is ran by the KC.