Skip to comments.Vatican considers making JPII a saint in 2015
Posted on 05/11/2012 6:18:19 AM PDT by Gillibrand
Polish newspaper reporting that JPII may be canonised at WJD in Krakow in 2015
(Excerpt) Read more at cathcon.blogspot.co.uk ...
A Communist saint is an oxymoron.
He could have reversed the evil that created an entirely new humanistic religion, yet he failed to do so as did his predecessors.
Standing before the throne of God and attempting to explain their failure would be an embarrassment to the beholder.
We need more great men to finish the job, and destroy communism.
John Paul II was anything but a communist.
I must have missed that part of his tenure, or my mind is going.
He did crack down on clergy-driven "Liberation Theology", at least in South America.
He forbid the clergy from holding public office. (Pity he didn't crack down on Catholic schools hiring such discards - i.e., Drinan of the pro-abortion stance...)
IMO, he was not in any way "Saintly" for his abysmal ethical, moral and probably criminal failure to address the pedophilia issue among priests.
One could probably argue that he lost some mental acuity from the assassination attempt.
Still, I do have a problem rewarding him when he atrociously neglected some of the most vulnerable of his "flock".
JPII should not be considered for Sainthood since he did nothing to protect Children from the Horrors of the Catholic Holocaust of our children by Homosexual Priests.
There were books written including one book by Father Cozzens stating that between 20 to 50 % of practicing Catholics Priests in the US are Homosexual.
This book was printed around the outing of the Phediphile
outing around 2001.
Both JPII and Bene XVI KNEW, and did nothing..
Looking forward to it.
All Christians are addressed as saints in Holy Scripture- not just a few.
Either he was a true believer and a saint- or he wasn’t a true believer and was not a saint.
Too late to alter that now, either way.
Oh give it up. Simply semantics. This isn’t the time nor the place for an argument about the proper use of the title “saint.” It’s obvious to anyone with any sense a grain of education that the Greek term in the NT simply means “holy ones.” The same term (or the Latin equivalent) has also come to be used as a title. Not a big deal nor a bone of contention for anyone other than those looking for a pointless argument over word usage.
It’s not “either,” “or”; it is “both,” “and.”
I’m not Catholic, and I consider both of those men to be saints.
Along with Margaret Thatcher.
I wish I had a picture of the three of them together. The grand Lady Thatcher was part of the trio that brought down the Soviet Union.
We need such leaders today.
Someone as astute as you probably sees no difference between the common priesthood of the believer and the ministerial Priesthood of the ordained either.
“The same term (or the Latin equivalent) has also come to be used as a title. Not a big deal nor a bone of contention for anyone other than those looking for a pointless argument over word usage.”
The first usage, “holy ones”, applied to all believers, is Biblical - inspired by God.
The second, “come to be used”, is man-made.
To you that may be a pointless distinction. No problem. I disagree.
“Someone as astute as you probably sees no difference between the common priesthood of the believer and the ministerial Priesthood of the ordained either.”
I am not astute. I can read.
There is a universal priesthood of every believer.
There are also elders & deacons as positions in the Church.
There is no office of “ministerial priest” in the New Testament.