Canonization Is Not Infallible

[King's Rook's Pawn]

I'm still befuddled as to whether St. Hugh the Little ever was considered an actual saint. Oh well.

Possibly some saints are declared infallibly (those that are declared through the "official" vetting process), whereas the ones that are more traditional, popular-cult saints are not infallibly known to be saints.

Sigh, this sort of thing drives me crazy. Who knew that the transcendent could involve such legal particulars?

Edited January 5, 2010 by King's Rook's Pawn

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='04 January 2010 - 07:13 PM' timestamp='1262657589' post='2029860']
I'm still befuddled as to whether St. Hugh the Little ever was considered an actual saint. Oh well.

Possibly some saints are declared infallibly (those that are declared through the "official" vetting process), whereas the ones that are more traditional, popular-cult saints are not infallibly known to be saints.

Sigh, this sort of thing drives me crazy. Who knew that the transcendent could involve such legal particulars?
[/quote]
I would not worry about it. This thread is akin to the debates about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='04 January 2010 - 09:06 PM' timestamp='1262657180' post='2029856']
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.
[/quote]

I was thinking more along the lines of clerics, many of whom in the past probably would have been well-acquainted with the Roman Rite, especially if they had studied under Latins, like St. Josaphat Kuncevyc.

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='04 January 2010 - 09:15 PM' timestamp='1262657718' post='2029863']
I would not worry about it. This thread is akin to the debates about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
[/quote]

Not really.

[Aloysius]

Apotheoun, is it a possibility that those who venerate saints canonized (or glorified) by their Church are venerating damned souls?

Is it a possibility that those who venerate saints canonized (or glorified) by their Church are venerating non-existent entities (ie, idolatry)?

this is not how many angels can dance on the pin of a needle. This is whether we can trust the Church so that our veneration of saints is never objectively idle idolatry or divination with damned souls. if it is possible that a canonized saint is not in heaven, the Church is endorsing divination; if it is possible that they do not exist, then the Church is endorsing idolatry.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='04 January 2010 - 09:15 PM' timestamp='1262657718' post='2029863']
I would not worry about it. This thread is akin to the debates about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
[/quote]
Turns out none because Angels hate dancing. They all stand around the edges of the pin and stare at each other.

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='04 January 2010 - 10:29 PM' timestamp='1262662145' post='2029942']
Apotheoun, is it a possibility that those who venerate saints canonized (or glorified) by their Church are venerating damned souls?

Is it a possibility that those who venerate saints canonized (or glorified) by their Church are venerating non-existent entities (ie, idolatry)?

this is not how many angels can dance on the pin of a needle. This is whether we can trust the Church so that our veneration of saints is never objectively idle idolatry or divination with damned souls. if it is possible that a canonized saint is not in heaven, the Church is endorsing divination; if it is possible that they do not exist, then the Church is endorsing idolatry.
[/quote]

Aloysius, those are pretty harsh words. Why can you not trust the church that Jesus himself promised would endure. Idolatry is way out there my friend, I know of no one who worships saints or places them above God, that is what idolatry is, either worshipping things like silver and gold or money or statues or works of mans hands, or placing anyone or thing above or before God. You are also way off base on divination, that is any practise that attempts to either foresee the future, like horoscopes or palm readers, or clairvoyance or summoning up demons or ghosts such as in seances etc. The Church does not make saints they recognize saints,, they do not look to the future or tarot cards or calirvoyants nor to demons or ghosts for info on saints lives which would be divination, they look at their acts and works and how they lived their lives and make a decision whether they are worthy of being RECOGNIZED as having led a saintly life. Saints make themselves saints by the life they lead they and the acts they performed, acts such as being martyred for Christ or prophets of Christ the latter being chosen as a conduit for God and the former making a decision to endure the ultimate sacrifce for God. We all are actually saints at one time in lives, after baptism when we are free of all sin including original sin, we are saints, then we make mistakes and tarnish our souls. Thank God we have the sacrament of penance and confession.

ed

[Luigi]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='04 January 2010 - 01:38 AM' timestamp='1262587087' post='2029415']
I think we can be absolutely sure that Mary is in Heaven.
[/quote]
Point taken - the priest I mentioned above probably included that detail and I just let it slip noiselessly from my mind.

[Luigi]

[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."

Wikipedia is now part of the magisterium? Oooohhhh, that's rich! Isn't Wikipedia related to Wiccan? Or is it a shortened formof Wicked Pedia? I'm joking, of course, but the point remains that "Just because you read it on Wikipedia, that doesn't make it true."

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]

He could still be an "acclaimed" saint, and still be in lots of indices, and yet never have been proclaimed a saint by the Church.

[Luigi]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='04 January 2010 - 10:29 PM' timestamp='1262662145' post='2029942']
Apotheoun, is it a possibility that those who venerate saints canonized (or glorified) by their Church are venerating damned souls?

[font="Book Antiqua"]I think it is a possibility. In the case of Little Hugh (of whom I've never heard before), IF it is true that he was acclaimed by a local cult for killing Jews (as mentioned in a previous post), it is possible that the people of his locale and time acclaimed him a saint but that God judged him quite differently. I think the possibility of wrongly venerating acclaimed saints is greater than for duly canonized saints, BUT it would still be possible that a duly canonized saint had committed grave sins which were never brought to light. We've heard recently that Mother Theresa lived a very long "dark night of the soul," an indication that we can't always tell what's going on in the soul of another, even one highly monitored by the press. As another example, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ (I can't remember his name) has been accused of some serious wrongdoing - IF the accusations are true (and I take no stance one way or another), they are very out of character with his external comportment and his reputation, and it would be possible to get through the canonization process without all the sordid details coming to light. I say nothing here of the possibility of forgiveness. I'm just saying you can't judge a book by its cover. [/font]

Is it a possibility that those who venerate saints canonized (or glorified) by their Church are venerating non-existent entities (ie, idolatry)?
[font="Book Antiqua"]I think this is a possibility, but I wouldn't label it idolatry. Those who pray to people (such as Little Hugh) whom they believe to be in heaven are doing something just and right, albeit misguided. The non-existent entity is not, in fact, receiving any veneration. And I believe God has enough sense to re-direct the veneration to an actually existent entity.[/font]

this is not how many angels can dance on the pin of a needle. This is whether we can trust the Church so that our veneration of saints is never objectively idle idolatry or divination with damned souls. if it is possible that a canonized saint is not in heaven, the Church is endorsing divination; if it is possible that they do not exist, then the Church is endorsing idolatry.
[/quote]
[font="Book Antiqua"]If I pray to a soul that I know to be damned, then I'm engaging in divination. But if I'm operating under the (incorrect) assumption that the object of my veneration is a saint in heaven, then I'm not deliberately turning away from God, and I think God - being omniscient and reading hearts and all - would not hold it against me.[/font]


And keep in mind that - especially as regards the suppresion of cults - one of the functions of canonizing a saint is to hold up a model of holiness to believers. One reason Pope John Paul II canonized so many saints was that he felt the people needed more current models whose holiness would be easier to emulate in our current times. So if Little Hugh's cult has been suppressed, maybe it's because the Church doesn't want the faithful to imitate the questionable (or even formerly acceptable) behavior.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Luigi

[Luigi]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='04 January 2010 - 09:13 PM' timestamp='1262657589' post='2029860']
I'm still befuddled as to whether St. Hugh the Little ever was considered an actual saint. Oh well.

Possibly some saints are declared infallibly (those that are declared through the "official" vetting process), whereas the ones that are more traditional, popular-cult saints are not infallibly known to be saints.

[b]Sigh, this sort of thing drives me crazy. Who knew that the transcendent could involve such legal particulars?[/b][/quote]

I doubt that it does, on the transcendent level; it's only us poor benighted children of Adam who wrangle over the legal particulars, in a dunderheaded attempt to figure the mind of God.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='05 January 2010 - 12:53 PM' timestamp='1262656427' post='2029842']
If you die in the state of grace.
[/quote]
Then apparently one day I will achieve a state of grace.

[Aloysius]

my point is that we CAN trust that those who are canonized are not damned souls and are not non-existent entities. IF they were, then venerating them would be akin to conversing with the damned or committing idolatry by venerating empty non-existent things. When we venerate saints that the Church tells us to venerate, we can be assured that we are venerating those who are already in heaven with divine and Catholic faith. when we ask for the intercession of some non-canonized person we do so conditionally, ie "dear Grandma, if you're in heaven (or purgatory), please pray for me" (not that we have to verbalize that every time, but we should definitely be of that mindset, because we should be also be praying FOR anyone who has died and is not canonized)... but we have no need to be conditional with canonized saints because we have absolute assurance that they are in heaven.

we venerate saints on the altar because we have the certitude of divine faith that those saints are in heaven.

and I think there was more confusion: Hugh, like Simon, was venerated for being killed by Jews, though these charges were unsubstantiated and charged with the anti-semitic belief of medieval Christians that Jews ritually murdered Christian children. they are real people who went missing and ended up dead; I think in the case of Simon they say it's possible that Christians did it and framed the Jews... there were a whole bunch of problems with the case in Rome, the papal legate didn't really believe the story at the time and suspected a fraud being perpetrated by the Christian community there... but the Bishop of Trent was adamant about the case... there was a real kid named Simon who went missing and was murdered around Easter time, and I believe that Simon went to heaven... and the reasons behind his murder may have been connected to the antisemitic fraud, it may be possible to call him a martyr even if he was not ritually murdered by Jews. in any event, his cult has been suppressed (and Rexi, I don't remember about his status in private devotions, I thought I'd seen the wording of the suppression from Paul VI before but I forget how it was worded and can't find it again) and he is not to be venerated publicly nor his devotion to be spread because the story of his death is historically dubious, corrupt, and inspiring of antisemitism.

but that doesn't mean that those who venerated him before his suppression were venerating someone who wasn't in heaven.

the point is that in dealing with these transcendent matters, there's no need to be so legalistic. we trust that everyone the Church has ever raised to the altars; be it through the Congregation in Rome or through the sense of the faithful, is in heaven. it's really a simple matter of faith, we can look to the Church for a list of who is in heaven; obviously, history will call into question certain facts about their life, but it's the transcendent matter, not the matter of their earthly life, that we can have certitude about. we are assured of their eternal reward and can ask them to intercede for us in heaven.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Aloysius

[OraProMe]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' date='04 January 2010 - 08:53 PM' timestamp='1262656383' post='2029840']
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. [b]I know this because Jesus inferred it in one of his messages to me.[/b] 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]
[/quote]


huh?

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='OraProMe' date='05 January 2010 - 01:33 AM' timestamp='1262676786' post='2030099']
huh?
[/quote]

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='OraProMe' date='05 January 2010 - 02:33 AM' timestamp='1262676786' post='2030099']
huh?
[/quote]

I thought that, too, Ora.