Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 10:50 AM Apr 2014

Canonization rules send an unsettling message about God

Canonization rules send an unsettling message about God

Heaven’s lobbyists?

By James Carroll | GLOBE COLUMNIST APRIL 14, 2014


THE CATHOLIC world is gearing up for the dual canonization of Popes John Paul II and John XXIII later this month. The recognition of these two giant figures as saints is a joyous occasion, to be sure. Yet lurking below its surface is an unsettling message — indeed, one that amounts to a kind of church-sponsored blasphemy.

The canonization process depends on the crediting of miracles to those being named as saints. In Catholic thinking, saints are thought to be intimately in God’s presence in heaven; to establish that a candidate for sainthood fits that criterion, a first kind of “proof” is required. Someone, usually with a grave medical problem, expressly asks for an intervention in the name of the candidate. If the medical problem is resolved without any “natural” explanation, a Vatican board of investigators, having sifted through the “evidence,” asserts that the cure is a “miracle.” The presumptive saint is understood to have succeeded in getting God to bend the normal laws of nature for the sake of the one prayed for.

That those events are taken to represent divine interventions says something quite horrible about how God operates — specifically, that even as God intervenes on behalf of those who pray to specific deceased mortals, all other people are left to their fate.

Under current practice, two certified miracles are necessary to establish that a candidate for sainthood is indeed in heaven, exercising supernatural influence. John Paul II, who died in 2005, is credited with the cure of a French nun with Parkinson’s disease that same year, and with the 2011 cure of a Costa Rican woman with an aneurysm. John XXIII, best remembered as the pope who convened the Second Vatican Council, is credited with the 1966 cure of an Italian nun who was dying from stomach hemorrhages.

more
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/04/14/canonization-rules-send-unsettling-message-about-god/PNWrmD5Je1U1mcLbpKRU3J/story.html
16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Canonization rules send an unsettling message about God (Original Post) DonViejo Apr 2014 OP
It also sends the message Goblinmonger Apr 2014 #1
Heal!! Seems like they coulda used some tips from evangies to get their quota of just 2........ lunasun Apr 2014 #2
According to Hoyle el_bryanto Apr 2014 #3
Love that movie. Goblinmonger Apr 2014 #4
As in that exchange, like many here, the most plausible answer to "why" is ignored. cleanhippie Apr 2014 #6
To many Christians a saint is a believer living or dead. hrmjustin Apr 2014 #5
a PR stunt, nothing more nt msongs Apr 2014 #7
Pretty much, yeah skepticscott Apr 2014 #9
So God doesn't decide who a saint is? edhopper Apr 2014 #8
John the 23rd should have been sainted decades ago. hrmjustin Apr 2014 #10
The Vatican linked his achieving Saint status DonViejo Apr 2014 #11
Thanks for the info. hrmjustin Apr 2014 #16
Did God tell you that? skepticscott Apr 2014 #12
Personally I feel he is a saint already. hrmjustin Apr 2014 #14
He was, okasha Apr 2014 #13
I forgot all about that. hrmjustin Apr 2014 #15
 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
1. It also sends the message
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 10:57 AM
Apr 2014

that god intervenes against the laws of the natural world. Wonder why people don't understand the scientific realities of the world? This is part of the problem.

lunasun

(21,646 posts)
2. Heal!! Seems like they coulda used some tips from evangies to get their quota of just 2........
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 11:15 AM
Apr 2014



sorta sad considering 2014

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
3. According to Hoyle
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 11:16 AM
Apr 2014
Jules: Man, I just been sitting here thinking.
Vincent: About what?
Jules: About the miracle we just witnessed.
Vincent: The miracle you witnessed. I witnessed a freak occurrence.
Jules: What is a miracle, Vincent?
Vincent: An act of God.
Jules: And what's an act of God?
Vincent: When God makes the impossible possible. But this morning, I don't think it qualifies.
Jules: Hey, Vincent, don't you see? That shit don't matter. You're judging this shit the wrong way. I mean, it could be that God stopped the bullets, or He changed Coke to Pepsi, He found my fucking car keys. You don't judge shit like this based on merit. Now, whether or not what we experienced was an "according to Hoyle" miracle is insignificant. What is significant is that I felt the touch of God. God got involved.
Vincent: But why?
Jules: Well, that's what's fucking with me. I don't know why, but I can't go back to sleep.
- "Pulp Fiction"


Bryant
 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
4. Love that movie.
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 11:22 AM
Apr 2014

Though still like Reservoir Dogs better.

I'm all fine with that as long as Catholics realize that's the case and that calling JPII a saint and claiming he miraculously healed those people is ridiculous and meaningless to me.

cleanhippie

(19,705 posts)
6. As in that exchange, like many here, the most plausible answer to "why" is ignored.
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 11:37 AM
Apr 2014

He "felt the touch of god" because he was place in a highly stressful situation. Science and psychology explain "why" humans attribute agency to stressful situations. See The Believing Brain by Michael Schumer fr details.

The point is that there are more plausible and empiric reasons than "god did it", which is the intellectually laziest explanation.

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
9. Pretty much, yeah
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 02:43 PM
Apr 2014

The decision to make JP II a saint was made before the formal process ever started. Ginning up a couple of "miracles" to close the deal was just a formality. If you wave your hands over enough sick people, some of them are bound to get better.

edhopper

(33,584 posts)
8. So God doesn't decide who a saint is?
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 02:10 PM
Apr 2014

It's voted on in the Vatican? What happens in Heaven after they get the nod? What about those who performed miracles but the investigations didn't uncover them. Are they denied sainthood due to a clerical error. and what about all those Saints that didn't exist, yet people prayed to them and some claimed miracles brought by them? Don't you think God could have let the Pope or someone know they weren't real?

Sainthood seems like a curious thing full of quandries.

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
11. The Vatican linked his achieving Saint status
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 03:09 PM
Apr 2014

with Pius XII who is never going to get it owing to his role during WW2 . I think it was Benedict that de-linked John XXIII and Pius, pairing him with JP II instead

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
12. Did God tell you that?
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 04:09 PM
Apr 2014

Or did he perform his miracles on you?

And did you really think being made a "saint" had anything to do with deserving it?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Canonization rules send a...