Fri 31st Oct 2014 | Last updated: Fri 31st Oct 2014 at 14:03pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo

Latest News

Cardinals ‘approve miracles attributed to Blessed John Paul II and Blessed John XXIII’

By on Tuesday, 2 July 2013

John Paul II meets the nephew and nieces of John XXIII in 2000 (AP)

John Paul II meets the nephew and nieces of John XXIII in 2000 (AP)

The cardinals and archbishops who are members of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints met today and, according to Italian news reports, took steps to advance the canonisation Causes of Blesseds John Paul II and John XXIII.

The Vatican press office confirmed the meeting, but said that all deliberations in Causes are secret until the Pope issues the relevant decrees.

The Italian news agency ANSA reported that the cardinals approved the miracle needed for Blessed John Paul’s canonisation. Previously, a panel of physicians said there was no medical explanation for the healing that occurred, and a panel of theologians said there was evidence that prayers asking God to heal the person in question were addressed through the intercession of Blessed John Paul.

The canonisation would be scheduled after Pope Francis approves the publication of a decree recognising the miracle and after he consults members of the College of Cardinals.

Although early reports had expressed optimism about a canonisation ceremony in October to coincide with the 35th anniversary of Blessed John Paul’s election, news reports today said there was not enough time to organise the event. Instead, the dates under discussion were November or December, or even spring 2014. Apparently, the idea would be to canonise the two popes at the same ceremony.

  • NatOns

    Splendid news, now for the politically hard part: the Venerable Pius XII. There has, of late, been a distinct move among some scholars both Catholic and Jewish to drive a wholly unjustified wedge been Pius XII and John XXII as also with John Paul II. Making Pius XII out to be a Hollywood-style Bad Pope to the Good Pope image of John XXIII and the Great Pope formula for John Paul II (at least in relations with Jewish groups for the last, for in other ways JP II remains a fascistic, imperialist, reactionary dictator in the eyes of many Marxist/ Stalinist/ Maoist Catholic reformers, e.g. seminarian teachers, college theologians, publicly acclaimed historians, etc).

    It is as though Roncalli, Blessed John XXIII, was Righteous among the Gentiles, because he helped to save Jews via Bulgaria and Turkey (in the face of Vatican opposition and obfuscation), whereas Pius XII was wilfully negligent toward the plight of the Jewish People as Jews, sat stony-faced in silent inaction toward the genocide unfolding from Nazi scientific eugenics, and was culpably involved in the attempted mass extinction of Italian Jews (although one public word of opposition from Pius on German antisemitism could have brought the structure of Nazism tumbling down or minimized its genocidal effect).

    And worse, Blessed John Paul II – by-passing the mere window dressing efforts of Paul VI – single-handedly brought an end to two millennia of mindlessly phobic, violent and aggressive reactions toward their friendly, loyal, and uncontroversial Jewish neighbours by the wicked, inquisitorial, crusading Roman Catholic bully boys. Pius XII was, by contrast, execrated worldwide by Jews during his life, at his funeral, and for years afterwards; after all, not one Jewish person – scholar, teacher or man in the street (of Rome) – rose to his defence when assaulted by Soviet defamation or Catholic assaults.

    http://commons.colgate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1091&context=car

    Pope Francis and Jewish leaders have a great deal of work to do, and it is so much more than opening Vatican files .. when their historical contents can be viewed just as well (and less partially) from other excellent sources .. if rampant falsehoods against the saintly Pontiff, Venerable Pius XII, are to be redressed in public, and his influence on John XXIII and John Paul II are to be appreciated for what they were – indispensable.

  • Kevin

    The lack of any apparent adversarial element to this judicial process – particularly the absence of the Devil’s Advocate – leaves me with some concern. Sceptics will question, for example, the cure of Sister Marie Simon-Pierre. It would be nice to be forearmed against such scepticism with more than just a claim to infallibility.

    The fact of Christ’s Resurrection has been well transmitted to us over two millennia given the technological limitations of the various periods that have passed during this time. Now we have the ability to analyse and record to a very fine level of detail.

    Here would be a perfect opportunity to demonstrate to the world a reconciliation of faith and reason. It should be possible to educate Catholics thoroughly in this matter.

  • Frank

    Would you agree Kevin that the sort of approach you mention has is used by the Lourdes medical commission? Unfortunately, it seems there are still those who refuse to accept this.

  • http://www.beachlaw.org/ Kevin Beach

    How about another Jewish view on Pius XII? Not a particularly modern one either:

    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/piusdef2.html

  • Timotheos

    For those who regard Francis as a true pope, these ‘con-anisations’, if they go
    ahead, must necessarily be regarded as infallible. Therefore, the unsatisfactory
    nature of the evidence is surely academic.

    The powers occupying the Vatican are clearly manufacturing something so
    extraordinary in the case of Wojtyla that any scepticism will be demolished –
    at least so they hope. It will all, of course, be a gigantic hoax, far beyond
    the deceptive temporary cure of the French nun with a Parkinson-like illness,
    but the sheer scale and effrontery of it (its chutzpah) is calculated to overpower all non-sedevacantist ‘Catholics’.

  • Jon Brownridge

    Oh no! Are we still into miracles…?

  • PaulF

    May God prevent it.
    I don’t wish to question the character of either pope, but they did things which could never be accepted as normative for Christians.
    One example. A glance at the Temple of Understanding website will show that this movement, founded in 1960 with the purpose of erecting a ‘multifaith’ temple in Washington (which thank God was never built), is among the most portentous and risible attempts at syncretism in recent history. Among its ‘Founder Friends,’ listed back in 1960, is ‘H.H. Pope John XXIII.’ The ‘credit’ still stands, and to my knowledge has never been repudiated.

  • Peter

    You and I exist from one moment to the next. Isn’t that a miracle?

  • NatOns

    Or indeed this (now ‘controversial’ scholarly effort to redress defamation):

    http://www.ptwf.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=132:pope-pius-xii&catid=91&Itemid=595

    But who wants to listen to mere truth when calumnious opinion can get in the way?

  • Cradle Catholic

    JP2 was a great humanitarian who was beloved throughout the world for his message that all men are saved and that all religions are equally valid.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Yes, YES, and YES !!!

    Deny Miracles, and you deny the entirety of the Faith.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Good grief, it’s the café “catholic” again …

  • NatOns

    The absence of – or rather a retrenching of – the role promotor fidei (Promoter of the Faith) shows only that it has been subsumed into the ordinary manner of preparing positions on virtues or on martyrdom. The Relator – reporter – must examine all the evidence, and write reports and explanations for the Process. The “Devil’s Advocate” still presides over the theologians, and presents an expert’s report.

    “The Sacred Congregation is to have one Promotor of the Faith or Prelate Theologian. His responsibility is:
    1. to preside over the meeting of the theologians, with the right to vote;
    2. to prepare the report on the meeting itself;
    3. to be present as an expert at the meeting of the Cardinals and Bishops, although without the right to vote.
    If necessary for one or another cause, a Promotor of the Faith for that particular case can be nominated by the Cardinal Prefect.” John Paul II, Divinis Perfectionis Magister.

    http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_25011983_divinus-perfectionis-magister_en.html

    One may regret the loss of a Hollywood style of adversarial – You Are The Jury/ Perry Mason/ Judge Judy imitating – advocacy, that imaginative and highly entertaining rhetoric has nothing whatever to do with the cool assessment of available evidence – after all, it is not a process to judge the saint in question (that is for God to do) but merely to test the evidence for a saintly life and any worthiness/ unworthiness for listing at God’s altar in divine liturgy as a leader in the Faith (God’s signs, wonders and favours to the saintly soul being but a miraculous part of the whole, rather dull, process .. as fleshly weaknesses are but a human part in the vocation to a crown of glory – alive before God).

  • Burt

    My God! It’s about time you grew out of your cradle. You aren’t a Catholic whatever you think you are.

  • Benedict Carter

    “Humanitarian” is the key word for you, Peter, isn’t it?

    How are all men saved unless they have faith, and how can they avoid mortal sin except with the assistance of Grace?

    Grace is given through the Sacraments, one of which Our Lord Himself said was so necessary that “Unless you eat my Body and drink my Blood, you shall not have life within you”.

    No. Your statement of what you wish JP II had said isn’t true.

  • PaulF

    Timotheos, why do you say that canonizations must necessarily be regarded as infallible? I often hear this said, but I cannot find any instance of the Church teaching definitively that canonizations are infallible. In fact, the conditions for infallibility set out in the First Vatican Council and cited in the Catechism would seem to preclude canonizations from infallibility.

  • Jason

    Seems very self serving to speed canonize two modern popes in this way especially since they were mostly just popular personalities rather than wise rulers or great teachers as Pope St. Gregory the Great or Benedict XVI were respectively.

  • Jon Brownridge

    That’s like saying, deny acupuncture and you deny the entirety of the medical profession.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    No it jolly well ISN’T !!!

    Miracles :

    The Incarnation

    The Resurrection

    Our immortal Souls

    Salvation

    Transsubstantiation of bread and wine into Flesh and Blood

    The Real Presence

    The Sacraments.

    Deny these, and there is NOTHING left of the Faith.

  • Timotheos

    PaulF, You ask a good question. Here’s the answer. Vatican I does not define the limits of the Church’s infallibility. This is a common misunderstanding based on the nefarious propaganda of theologians keen to minimalize the full extent of the Church’s infallibility. Vatican I simply states that the definitory nuclei of statements on faith or morals solemnly addressed to the whole Church by the Pope are free from error. Such statements concern formally revealed truths. These are the primary objects of the Church’s infallibility.

    However, there also exist secondary objects of ecclesial infallibility. These concern truths which are so closely associated with the formal truths of Revelation that they are infallibly protected from error by the Holy Spirit. Among these are the canonizations of saints. You can find out more in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott, p. 299.

    Note also that the Church is generally considered infallible in her liturgical discipline. In other words, the true Church cannot promulgate sacramental rites that are harmful to the faith of her children. Pseudo-traditionalists fail to understand this. They regard the novus ordo ‘mass’ as (i) valid and (ii) unedifying if not positively harmful. Such views represent a fundamental attack on the Church’s infallibility. Either the novus ordo ‘mass’ is valid AND edifying or else it is neither.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Correct — as a matter of fact, Vatican I simply defined the conditions whereby a new avenue of communication to the Faithful of an infallible doctrine was established.

    The nature of doctrinal infallibility itself resides in the Divine nature of the Revelation.

  • Agnus

    Examining the History of the Catholic Church in England, Spain and France – you will find that the supernatural has always been closely knit with the theological views of the Catholic Church. It has also always been a dominant factor in the lives of the majority of the greatest Saints. (thousands of them!)

    St Padre Pio, bore the Holy Stigmata for 50 years, was proven to have been in two places at once, and was seen levitating holding a prayer book above His Monastry by Italian pilots during the War.. St Anne Catherine Emmerich ALSO bore the Holy Stigmata and survived for years on the Holy Eucharist alone and so did St Gemma Galgani, and St Anna Maria Taigi.

    St Francis of Assisi also bore the Holy Stigmata and heard Christ speaking to him (is he a fake?) and the not yet Canonised Marie Julie Jahenny of France.spent over a month in a Hospital being examined thoroughly because she survived for many years on just eating the Consecrated Eucharist. Her prophecies and the documented locutions of conversations between Our Lord, Our Lady, St Michael the Archangel and Satan are frightening in their accuracy. Especially the prophecies being fulfilled today.

    I appreciate that certain individuals are rather eager to hush up the miracles and supernatural occurrences of the Catholic Church, but, guess what, – trying to keep Our Lord Jesus Christ from manifesting His presence in performing miraculous feats of supernatural splendour which show His Glory and TRUE character to an awe-struck world, is rather akin to trying to shut an elephant in a closet. It either creates such havoc that you have to let it out – or you will find that that closet door just refuses to close!

    Believe it or not. Our Lord Jesus Christ is overly enthusiastic to bring attention to Himself. As the Bible states “If every tongue were still, the rocks and stones themselves will cry out” Yes they do literally CRY out – He shows His state of mind to us physically.- Examine the weeping statues at Akita (and read the prophecies) watch the scientific examination of the blood stained Cristo agonia by Dr Ricardo Castanon Phd on Youtube.

    Don’t try and limit Our Lord Jesus to the Bible Alone. To do so is to become Protestant.

    The Protestant Reformation separated the Supernatural from the Bible. The Protestants stole the Bible – and the New Age cult stole the supernatural. The Supernatural without Christ is Demonic witchcraft – the Church without the Supernatural is Protestantism.

    If you are Catholic – I put it to you most gently – that you do not really appreciate The Faith in Her fullness. Isn’t the fact that the Holy Shroud of Turin, the Sudarium, and all the Eucharistic Miracles – bearing the same DNA a MIRACLE? Isn’t it marvellous to you that the Tilma of the Virgin of Guadalupe, and the Transmigration of the Holy House of Loretto are so well documented/

    It is the Protestants that deny the Supernatural elements of the Catholic Faith. To not be interested in the Supernatural aspects of Catholicism is rather uncomfortably suggestive of a soul who really does not want proof that the Bible is an authentic testimony. If you truly love Christ, you must love Him as He really is. The God who is forever with us, giving us proof when needed that He is real, alive, miraculous – and not just a person we read about in the Holy Bible.

    Here it is again – This will interest you. (I hope………..)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvMD901sty4

  • Agnus

    “JP2 was a great humanitarian who was beloved throughout the world for his message that all men are saved and that all religions are equally valid.”

    No he did not. Why would He. The Church does not teach that – it never would teach that. Perhaps you read a deliberately misleading translation. Our Lord Jesus Christ said with great clarity Himself – that they were not all equal.

    John 8:24 “I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am [the one I claim to be],you will indeed die in your sins.”

    John 14:6 ” Jesus told him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.”

    Seems pretty emphatic!

    Also the Old Testament tells us frequently that God the Father is very angry and is likely to permit punishment to befall the Jews when they commit adultery with false gods. He is a “Jealous God”. Since Christ said “I and the Father are One (John 10:30!) I take it Our Lord Jesus shares the same dislike of the sin of “Apostasy” as His Father does.

    See this http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/februaryweb-only/15.0.html

    I have included some fragments from his encyclical below

    REDEMPTORIS MISSIO – Encyclical 1990 (Blsd JP II)

    On the permanent validity of the Church’s missionary mandate
    “The Church As Sign and Instrument of Salvation

    “No one comes to the Father, but by me” (Jn 14:6)

    5. If we go back to the beginnings of the Church, we find a clear affirmation that Christ is the one Savior of all, the only one able to reveal God and lead to God. In reply to the Jewish religious authorities who question the apostles about the healing of the lame man, Peter says: “By the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man is standing before you well…. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:10, 12). This statement, which was made to the Sanhedrin, has a universal value, since for all people-Jews and Gentiles alike – salvation can only come from Jesus Christ.

    The universality of this salvation in Christ is asserted throughout the New Testament. St. Paul acknowledges the risen Christ as the Lord. He writes: “Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth – as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’ – yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist” (1 Cor 8:5-6). One God and one Lord are asserted by way of contrast to the multitude of “gods” and “lords” commonly accepted. Paul reacts against the polytheism of the religious environment of his time and emphasizes what is characteristic of the Christian faith: belief in one God and in one Lord sent by God.

    9. The first beneficiary of salvation is the Church. Christ won the Church for himself at the price of his own blood and made the Church his co-worker in the salvation of the world. Indeed, Christ dwells within the Church. She is his Bride. It is he who causes her to grow. He carries out his mission through her.

    The Council makes frequent reference to the Church’s role in the salvation of mankind. While acknowledging that God loves all people and grants them the possibility of being saved (cf. l Tm 2:4),15 the Church believes that God has established Christ as the one mediator and that she herself has been established as the universal sacrament of salvation. 16 “To this catholic unity of the people of God, therefore,…all are called, and they belong to it or are ordered to it in various ways, whether they be Catholic faithful or others who believe in Christ or finally all people everywhere who by the grace of God are called to salvation.”17 It is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for salvation. Both these truths help us to understand the one mystery of salvation, so that we can come to know God’s mercy and our own responsibility. Salvation, which always remains a gift of the Holy Spirit, requires man’s cooperation, both to save himself and to save others. This is God’s will, and this is why he established the Church and made her a part of his plan of salvation. Referring to “this messianic people,” the Council says; “It has been set up by Christ as a communion of life, love and truth; by him too it is taken up as the instrument of salvation for all, and sent on a mission to the whole world as the light of the world and the salt of the earth.”18

    http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_07121990_redemptoris-missio_en.html

  • Mark

    In NO way JP2 said that all religions are equal nor he said all men are saved, where did you get this twisted idea? No decent person would put his words into the mouth of others.

  • Mark

    On the spot…the key phrase, duly solemn act of the Church. Love the book by Ludwig Ott ;-)….’traditionalists” should really read this wonderful book to clear some of their misconceptions about the Teaching Authority and aspects of the Church’s infallibility through General-Ecumenical Councils.

    The problem is, people who have disagreement with some of the Church’s authoritative teachings tend to find dubious ways to interpret previous teachings in order to justify whatever positions they hold.

  • PaulF

    Thank you. I understand what you say, though I still have difficulty with the infallibility of canonizations. The question of who is or is not a saint, while important, is nothing like a de fide issue.
    There is also the earlier saints who have been removed from the canon – if you are sedevacantist I expect you do not accept their removal.

  • PaulF

    Understood. Do you regard canonizations as infallible?
    I’m hoping to learn that they are not, because the proposed canonizations referred to in this article would, in my opinion, bring the process into disrepute – not because I think these two popes are personally reprobate, but because I think the flaws in their teaching and practice should not be set aside as insignificant.

  • http://jabbapapa.wordpress.com/ Julian Lord

    Do you regard canonizations as infallible?

    Not every single individual canonisation can be considered to be provided with the Charism of infallibility ; particularly in cases where entire groups of people are canonised.

    However, there can also be NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER that the canonisations (for example) of Saint Mary, Saint Peter, Saint Paul, Saint James, Saint Francis, Saint Catherine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Saint Augustine, Saint Bernadette Soubirous, Saint Saint Joseph, Moses, Abraham, Saint John Baptist, Saint Theresa of Avila, and so on and so forth are exactly provided with infallibility.

  • Timotheos

    Your concerns about recent ‘beatifications’ and ‘canonizations’ are eminently justified. It was this issue that finally forced me to seriously investigate the claims of sedevacantism, claims which I had not previously studied with sufficient care and prayerfulness.

    If the Church could teach that a person is in Heaven and ask the faithful to emulate them when in fact they were in Hell having lived a truly evil life, then the Church would be deceiving her children and feeding them poison. This is impossible. The doctrine of the Communion of Saints is not some kind of abstract theory. When the Church teaches that so-and-so is a member of the Communion of Saints in Heaven, she cannot be deceived on this point. Nor can she reverse her previous determinations. No formally canonized saint has ever been ‘demoted’. None of the V2 sect’s acts (from 1958 to the present day) has any validity for the Church.

  • Jon Brownridge

    On Fowler’s faith development stages, you appear to be at Level2, which is OK if you are under 18.

  • PaulF

    Thank you. So the charism of infallibility almost always applies but there can be very rare exceptions. I can certainly run with that.