Religion
Related: About this forumCanonization rules send an unsettling message about God
Canonization rules send an unsettling message about GodHeavens 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 Gods 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 Parkinsons 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
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)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)sorta sad considering 2014
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Jules: Man, I just been sitting here thinking.- "Pulp Fiction"
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.
Bryant
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)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)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.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I subscribe to this view.
msongs
(67,413 posts)skepticscott
(13,029 posts)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)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.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)DonViejo
(60,536 posts)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
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)skepticscott
(13,029 posts)Or did he perform his miracles on you?
And did you really think being made a "saint" had anything to do with deserving it?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)God doesn't tell me things.
okasha
(11,573 posts)by the Episcopal Church.
Angelo Roncalli, Bishop at Rome, feast day 4 June.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)He was a good natured soul.