Took a hop over to r/Catholicism this morning, and I saw outrage at the canonization of Pope Paul VI. Is this about Vatican II? Something else?
Small people doing small things thinking small thoughts. Like you and me at times.
They’re probably mad that he didn’t let them use artificial birth control. Or at least the non-trads are.
Tell them to suck it up, buttercup.
Honestly, I’d say that standing up to the large groups that wanted to allow artificial contraception is a perfect example of heroic virtue, or, at the very least, it’s an excellent example of papal leadership that all other popes should learn to follow.
I always thought it was a pretty gutsy move, all things considered.
- An abbreviation of ‘radical’–a term made popular by the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Still primarily used by people on the West Coast who find words like ‘cool’, ‘awesome’, and ‘tight’ to be tired and overused.
Just a little useless information…
Even if we stipulate that Paul VI wasn’t an effective administrator, that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be canonized.
Celestine V was , by all reports, over his head as Pope and resigned the papacy- yet is a canonized saint.
I don’t think it’s cur place to declare that someone isn’t worthy of heaven.
In addition, I’m not sure being a weak Pope would be a sin that would keep you out of Heaven.
The key to Celestine is that he resigned; the responsible thing to do.
If a pope was not good at governing the Church, then that does mean he ought not to be canonized.
The reason we canonize people is not SOLEY to recognize that they’re in heaven, but becuase they demonstrated REMARKABLE and HEROIC virtue and holiness. Part of holiness is fulfilling the basic duties belonging to your state in life. The responsible government of the Church belongs to the duties of the Pope’s state in life.
Were you referring/replying to me?
No, just in general. No worries
I’m not worrying. I would like to say, though, that doubting one’s canonization is not the same thing as deciding whether or not one is worthy of heaven.
Ok. Good. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
There are several reasons typically cited by traditional Catholics when they register concerns about Paul VI’s canonization. First, while they’re normally happy that he defended Church teaching regarding contraception, there are those who feel that permitting the use of natural family planning introduced a novelty that can be used inappropriately by some. Second, though he later stated that the “smoke of Satan” had entered the Church, he didn’t stop the council. Third, there are questions about his own personal history that I’m not going to repeat here. I’m guessing they can be located quite easily online.
I haven’t heard that before, and wonder if it isn’t a case of human precepts passed off as doctrine.
Saint Francis de Sales talks about it a lot.
Brings to mind also Mother Teresa, “Do small things with great love.”
And Thérèse of Lisieux, “Holiness consists simply in doing God’s will, and being just what God wants us to be.”
More to the topic at hand, I wouldn’t judge a pope by our human understanding of how effective he is/was. God’s ways are not our ways (Isaiah 55:9).
Yeah, Dante, close to Celestine’s time, seems to even have him in hell: “the one who gave the great refusal.”
Pope St. Paul VI was great for the Eastern Churches. The first to visit the Ecumenical Patriarch since the 9 century or something? VII was great for us eastern Catholics.