Canonization Is Not Infallible

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='04 January 2010 - 05:23 PM' timestamp='1262643830' post='2029654']
Are you sure? His [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Saint_Hugh_of_Lincoln"]Wikipedia page[/url] says, "Shortly after news was spread of his death, miracles were attributed to Hugh and he was rushed into sainthood. Hugh became one of the youngest individuals accorded sainthood, with July 27 declared his feast day. Over time, however, the question of the rush to sainthood was raised, and Hugh’s name was not included in Butler’s Lives of the Saints (1756–1759). Today, Hugh’s sainthood is significantly downplayed. Although the Vatican has not revoked the status of sainthood for the child, his feast is no longer officially celebrated."

Furthermore, he's listed on the [url="http://saints.sqpn.com/sainth22.htm"]Saints Index[/url], on [url="http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=3814"]Catholic Online[/url], and in the old [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07515b.htm"]Catholic Encyclopedia[/url]
[/quote]
Is he the one who was allegedly killed by the "dirty Jews"?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' date='04 January 2010 - 05:26 PM' timestamp='1262643994' post='2029655']
Is he the one who was allegedly killed by the "dirty Jews"?
[/quote]

Little Hugh, along with William of Norwich and Simon of Trent, are child saints who were allegedly murdered by Jews during the Middle Ages.

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='04 January 2010 - 05:23 PM' timestamp='1262643830' post='2029654']
Are you sure? His [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Saint_Hugh_of_Lincoln"]Wikipedia page[/url] says, "Shortly after news was spread of his death, miracles were attributed to Hugh and he was rushed into sainthood. Hugh became one of the youngest individuals accorded sainthood, with July 27 declared his feast day. Over time, however, the question of the rush to sainthood was raised, and Hugh’s name was not included in Butler’s Lives of the Saints (1756–1759). Today, Hugh’s sainthood is significantly downplayed. Although the Vatican has not revoked the status of sainthood for the child, his feast is no longer officially celebrated."

Furthermore, he's listed on the [url="http://saints.sqpn.com/sainth22.htm"]Saints Index[/url], on [url="http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=3814"]Catholic Online[/url], and in the old [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07515b.htm"]Catholic Encyclopedia[/url]
[/quote]

I guess what's germane both to this specific discussion, as well as the discussion at large, is the question of whom he was canonized by: the people, or the pope? (n.b. my prior post)

[Aloysius]

the infallible part of canonizations is that there is indeed someone in heaven that we can address and be inspired by their story; the story of their life is not considered infallible, it may be that this or that story about what they did on earth is not true, but the person themself is really in heaven.

and I would hold that the pre-congregation saints are infallibly defined as in heaven by the universal ordinary magisterium.

Saints like Simon of Trent have not only been removed from the calendar but have also had their cults suppressed, so unlike St. Christopher we may not even hold a private devotion to them. This is not to say that there isn't a Simon who lived in Trent who went to heaven and to whom the prayers of countless people who prayed to him were addressed, who maybe had a connection to persecuted Christians in some way, maybe was persecuted/martyred himself in some way, his cult was suppressed because his hagiography is historically inaccurate and promotes antisemitism... the infallible part of canonizations means that we can trust that the person we're praying to is in heaven. the Church tells us to no longer pray to Simon, but those who prayed to Simon in the past did not pray to a non-existant person or a person who was damned, but to a real person in heaven.

it's a matter of faith/morals because if the Church binds us to believe someone is in heaven and we pray to them, but they're in hell, [b]then the Church has encouraged evil divination and conversing with the souls of the damned.[/b]

the Church cannot lead us into such error; every saint she has, either through the Congregation or through the sense of the faithful, encouraged us to pray to, is a real and true person who is in heaven. those whose historicity is in question, well if the person didn't exist we cannot say for sure who the Church intended to lift to the altars; it may be that the story of their life isn't fully accurate, it may be that they had a different name in life, but they were real people who really exhibited the same heroic virtues that are recounted in their hagiographies, even if the details may not be the same.

obviously when the historicity of the person is not in question, then we know who it is that the Church intended to raise to the altars. once JPII is canonized, for instance, it's not like we can say "well, those who pray to JPII are praying to someone who exhibited those virtues but the story of JPII might not be accurate"... JPII is JPII... but Christopher who carried the infant Jesus over a river might be John who traveled around with the infant Jesus in his heart... since those who raised him to the altar knew very little for sure about him. But it is the will of God that someone, whom we call Christopher, has made it to heaven with the same virtues that the Christopher of the hagiograhies exhibited, someone who is a special patron to travelers.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Aloysius

[Apotheoun]

Such a beautiful Western treatment on the subject.

[Aloysius]

thanks.

I appreciate the Eastern approach which effectively has the same effect without bothering about the formulas of whether glorification is infallible or not, you simply trust your church and trust that those who you pray to are really and truly in heaven. You don't consider it possible that in a divine liturgy you're commemorating or conversing with a damned soul, even if you don't expressly formulate that their glorification and inclusion in your liturgy is quote-unquote "infallible"

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='04 January 2010 - 06:20 PM' timestamp='1262654435' post='2029795']
thanks.

I appreciate the Eastern approach which effectively has the same effect without bothering about the formulas of whether glorification is infallible or not, you simply trust your church and trust that those who you pray to are really and truly in heaven. You don't consider it possible that in a divine liturgy you're commemorating or conversing with a damned soul, even if you don't expressly formulate that their glorification and inclusion in your liturgy is quote-unquote "infallible"
[/quote]
Yes, Easterners do not see a need for this elaborate, and to be frank . . . modern system for glorifying our saints.

As an Eastern Christian I think it is better to avoid all the nonsense about infallible versus non-infallible formulas. After all, a formula is either true or false, and if it is true it does not become more true because a specific bishop says is it true. The modern West seems to want to "define" everything about the faith, which simply makes no sense to me as an Eastern Christian.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='04 January 2010 - 08:12 PM' timestamp='1262653979' post='2029781']
Saints like Simon of Trent have not only been removed from the calendar but have also had their cults suppressed, so unlike St. Christopher we may not even hold a private devotion to them. [/quote]

Are you sure about that? I thought that the suppression of cults only suppressed public veneration of a saint.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='04 January 2010 - 06:12 PM' timestamp='1262653979' post='2029781']
Saints like Simon of Trent have not only been removed from the calendar but have also had their cults suppressed . . .
[/quote]
Wow, suppressed! How sad for him if he really exists.

Lucky for me he was never venerated in the East, because of course the East does not use the Roman liturgical Calendar.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='04 January 2010 - 08:31 PM' timestamp='1262655098' post='2029810']
Lucky for me he was never venerated in the East, because of course the East does not use the Roman liturgical Calendar.
[/quote]

Some Eastern Catholic at some point probably venerated him.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 January 2010 - 06:37 PM' timestamp='1262655447' post='2029816']
Some Eastern Catholic at some point probably venerated him.
[/quote]
Unlikely. He is pretty obscure, and the Byzantine Churches have never use the Western liturgical calendar.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='04 January 2010 - 08:46 PM' timestamp='1262655998' post='2029827']
Unlikely. He is pretty obscure, and the Byzantine Churches have never use the Western liturgical calendar.
[/quote]

Individual Byzantines may have read the [i]Roman Martyrology[/i] for 24 March.

[Mark of the Cross]

Hey! All believers of Christ are saints. I have a boring unimportant life and I'm a sinner, but Jesus loves me and I'm going to heaven when I die. I know this because Jesus inferred it in one of his messages to me. So I really am unaffected by who gets canonised. I pray direct to God because he is the one who will perform the miracle if it suits his purpose.
I love my God and my God loves me. Full stop.[img]http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/271.gif[/img]

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' date='04 January 2010 - 08:53 PM' timestamp='1262656383' post='2029840']
I'm going to heaven when I die.
[/quote]

If you die in the state of grace.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Resurrexi

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 January 2010 - 06:48 PM' timestamp='1262656131' post='2029832']
Individual Byzantines may have read the [i]Roman Martyrology[/i] for 24 March.
[/quote]
I doubt that most would have had access to that text, but in the English speaking world they may have had access to [i]Butler's Lives of the Saints[/i]. Nevertheless, most of the life long Byzantines that I know use the [i]Byzantine Book of Prayer[/i] to celebrate the lives of the saints, which does not contain saints peculiar to the Roman Calendar.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Apotheoun