What do you think of the Beatification of JOHN PAUL II?

Cutlass

The Man Who Wasn't There.
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
47,758
Location
US of A
A Pope’s Beatification Stirs Excitement and Dissension
By RACHEL DONADIO
Published: April 28, 2011

VATICAN CITY — On a sunny afternoon this week, St. Peter’s Square was abuzz with life. Crowds lined up at the metal detectors. Tourists snapped photos. A workman was spraying down the travertine steps to the basilica. And inside, red cloth screens cordoned off a side chapel that will soon draw as many visitors as Michelangelo’s Pietà nearby.

...

The beatification is widely seen as a way not just to honor John Paul but to energize the Roman Catholic Church. Yet, like John Paul’s 26-year papacy itself, it has become intensely polarizing.

For one thing, Benedict waived the traditional five-year wait and began the process weeks after John Paul’s death, and critics across the Catholic spectrum have questioned the alacrity. Others say that the sex abuse crisis that emerged under John Paul is grounds against sainthood. On Saturday, at least one victims’ group plans a worldwide protest.

Defenders, however, say beatification is simply the formal seal of approval for a wildly popular pope who helped bring down Communism and whom many Catholics, especially in his native Poland, already consider a saint. Hundreds of thousands are expected in Rome, the biggest crowds since 2005, when cries of “Santo subito!” or “Sainthood now,” erupted at his funeral Mass.

“This beatification is different because this pope is different. He’s a man with a role in history, not just in church history,” said Andrea Riccardi, the founder of the Community of Sant’Egidio, a liberal Catholic group and a biographer of John Paul who testified in his favor in the beatification process. “The seal of sainthood doesn’t close the debate on history,” he added. “In a certain sense, for many Catholics he’s already a saint, even without beatification and, let’s be honest, even without a miracle.”

Saint-making is intensely political. The impulse must arise from the faithful, but ultimately most saints’ causes are championed by religious groups with the organizational skills, and fund-raising, to keep their causes alive. As Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and head of the Vatican’s doctrinal watchdog, Pope Benedict in 1989 criticized this tendency, saying there had been too many beatifications of marginal figures.

...

To Vatican watchers, John Paul’s beatification is a snapshot of the Catholic Church in 2011 — mingling deep faith and dense bureaucracy, grass-roots devotion and top-down power politics, the medieval and the contemporary.

In many ways, the beatification underscores how Benedict, a bookish yet never predictable pope whose papacy has been racked by crises and is intellectually focused on Europe, still derives much of his light and heat from his telegenic, globe-trotting predecessor.

But it also shows how dark clouds still hang over John Paul’s papacy, not least the sex abuse crisis and his close ties to the Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado, the Mexican founder of the wealthy and powerful religious order Legionaries of Christ. Father Maciel, a charismatic leader hailed by John Paul as a model of dynamic priesthood, was later found to have fathered several children and abused seminarians. Last year, Benedict took the step of placing the entire order under Vatican receivership.

But during John Paul’s papacy, Vatican officials blocked an investigation of Father Maciel, and the pope publicly honored him in 2004 even after seminarians had come forward with allegations of abuse. Father Maciel was particularly close to John Paul’s longtime personal secretary, Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz, now the archbishop of Krakow, who has championed the beatification.

Critics say that in beatifying John Paul, the Vatican is trying to close the history books before they have been fully opened.

...


Full article can be read HERE.


Ok, this guy was very popular, but somewhat controversial in life. And with many people, he remains very popular now. Is that sufficient to make him a saint? Or is this just politics? The Church using the popularity for its own ends, without regard to whether sainthood is actually merited. They are, after all, bending their own rules to push this through while he remains well known in living memory.
 
I'm all for it. I think he deserves it.
 
I misread the title as "beautification" and was confused.
 
Too soon.
Doesn't beatification require a couple miracles to their name? I was under the impression that this was a fairly rigorous process but it may have been changed post Vatican2.
 
I can't really have an opinion on it, since I'm not a Catholic, but I think I'm comfortable saying that JP2 did more good in the world than evil.
 
Too soon.
Doesn't beatification require a couple miracles to their name? I was under the impression that this was a fairly rigorous process but it may have been changed post Vatican2.
He performed at least one miracle: The case of Sister Marie Simon-Pierre, the French nun who was cured of Parkinson's Disease.
 
The Father Maciel thing alone should be keep John Paul II from ever being a saint. Bastard abused god only knows how many children and encouraged the men under him to follow in his pedophile footsteps, spent a significant portion of his life high as a kite on morphine. When the best moral thing you've ever done is steal church money to support your mistress(es?) and kid, you know you're a scumbag.

Despite this, John Paul's papal administration shielded Maciel against criticism and the law, because Maciel was bringing in money and recruits. I'm not fond of Benedict, but I'll give him credit where it's due. As soon as Benedict got his pope hat, he ordered Maciel to live a life of solitude and repentance, then set up a commission to root out abuse in Maciel's organization.
 
The guy who energised Poland and Eastern Europe against the Russian Empire - what a hero.

Ofc!

(I don't really care, sainthood or what - from what I know of him and his actions he is a good-LAD)
 
JP2 was alive in 1917? Russian Empire went belly-up in February of 1917. After that it was the RSFSR, a member of the USSR.
 
I think calling the SU, a Russian Empire is quite accurate.

It was essentially the Russian nation dominating it's neighbours.
 
I'm all for it. I think he deserves it.

Why do you care? You're not a Catholic by any means. If you're a nominal one, you're a pretty poor one, as referenced by your complete inability to abide by the catholic social teaching.
 
I think calling the SU, a Russian Empire is quite accurate.

It was essentially the Russian nation dominating it's neighbours.
Sure. If you must refer to it like that in a non-scholarly enviroment, it would be best to call it the Russian empire. The Russian Empire referred to Russia under the Romanov Tsars.
 
JP2 helped the Poles stand up to the Soviets. But he wasn't all that important to the fall of the USSR. Probably more important than Reagan's contribution to the Cold War. But only a piece of the puzzle, not the core of it.
 
Top Bottom