Skip to comments.The canonization of Vatican II continues: Paul VI beatification in October
Posted on 05/07/2014 2:34:45 AM PDT by markomalley
I read today at Vatican Insider that the Congregation of the Causes of Saints has approved unanimously (what else) a miracle through the intercession of Ven. Paul VI.
I suppose now the only thing left to do is beatify the Pope everyone forgets to remember and the set will be complete at least until the pool grows by one more.
This morning, cardinals and bishops of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints gave their final approval for the late Popes healing of an unborn child
Giovanni Battista Montinis beatification is near: this morning cardinals and bishops of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints unanimously approved the miracle attributed to the intercession of the Italian Pope from Brescia, who died in August 1978. The year which marked the canonization of two Popes John XXIII and John Paul II will also be the year of Paul VIs beatification. In the next few days Pope Francis will be promulgating the decree on the miracle attributed to the late Pope and the date suggested for the actual beatification is 19 October. The beatification is expected to take place in Rome on the occasion of the concluding ceremony of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the Family: [HEY! This is the canonization of HUMANAE VITAE too!] it was Paul VI himself who established the Synod in September 1965 in response to a request made by the Council fathers. [And what a day's work that was.] It should be noted that next August will mark the 50th anniversary of the publication of Paul VIs first big encyclical, the Ecclesiam Suam, which he wrote and edited entirely by himself.
The miracle attributed to the intercession of Paul VI was witnessed in the United States in 2001. It involved the healing of an unborn child, which was found to have serious problems and a high risk of brain damage: the foetus bladder was damaged and doctors reported ascites (presence of liquid in the abdomen) and anhydramnios (absence of fluid in the amniotic sac). All attempts to correct the problem proved futile and in the end the doctors said the child would either die in the womb or it would be born with severe renal impairment. Abortion was offered as an option but the mother refused. Instead, she took the advice given to her by a nun who was a friend of the family and had met Montini: she decided to pray for Paul VIs intercession using a fragment of the Popes vestments which the nun had given her.
Ten weeks later the results of the medical tests showed a substantial improvement in the childs health and it was born by Caesarean section in the 39th week of pregnancy. The case was presented to the former Postulator of the Cause, the Jesuit Paolo Molinari who passed away last week in Rome. Faith weekly Credere revealed that the diocesan inquiry was launched in 2003 and all witnesses agree that the case in question cannot be explained scientifically.
The child has made it to thirteen and his health is constantly monitored to ensure that his psychophysical state is normal. [Healing miracles have to be sudden, complete and lasting.] Doctors are especially keeping an eye on the childs renal function. On 12 December last year the medical consultation of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints headed by Professor Patrizio Polisca, confirmed the impossibility of explaining the healing and the dicasterys theologians gave their approval last 18 February. [Along with the doctors' and scientists' statement that the healing can't be explained, then theologians have to judge whether people were praying to Paul VI, and not, for example, to "Jesus, Mary, Joseph and all the saints and holy angels, and St. Rita and St. Jude, and Paul VI, and Fulton Sheen and Pauline Jaricot and....] Benedict XVI promulgated Paul VIs heroic virtues on 20 December 2012.
In honor of Paul VI, Pope Francis should, at the beatification, bring back the sedia gestatoria, far humbler than the expensive Popemobile and far greener.
If it was good enough for St. John XXIII and Bl. Paul VI, it is good enough for any Pope!
The worst Pope in the last 500 years, at least.
The Church is making itself ridiculous.
Look for more making blesseds to come for a few more popes.
What next, canonize Mohammed?
Montini did more damage to the Catholic Church than any man since Martin Luther.
Worse than Leo X (1513-1521)? (Just barely within the last 500 years.)
Pope Paul VI and the “Smoke of Satan”.
Canonizing every single Council participant would not reconcile the peculiar contradictions between pre- and post-Vatican II beliefs and practices. By current papal standards, St. Isaac Jogues was engaged in “solemn nonsense” and St. Thomas More’s refusal to compromise with Henry VIII was a rejection of “mercy”. Post-VII faux ecumenism is at the root of these strange new perceptions.
Father Z, I agree.
It's a paradox, isn't it?
Because if the world is still in existence 500 years from now --- and I mean an inhabited planet with human beings on it, who know they are human and not machines, animals, cyborgs or pure hellions --- they will have Paul VI to thank for it. Paul VI, Servus Servorum Dei.
I know exactly the allusions you are making here, and I would argue nevertheless that your statement is unjust.
A different interpretation is demanded by the fact that Francis has forcefully and frequently written and spoken in favor of evangelization, the outreach to all nations with the Good News of Jesus Christ, the mission to disciple and baptize every soul for the Kingdom of God.
To say that Pope Francis would object to the mission of St. Isaac Jogues is, I think, a frivolous rash judgment.
This argument does not demonstrate a diligent attention to accuracy and a fair evaluation of evidence.
I believe you could make your point in a stronger and more effective way if you paid more attention to exact quotes and closely related context.
St. Thomas More was a stickler about exact words, and silences, and how to fairly construe them. His life depended on it. In such matters, he said he would even treat the Devil fairly. I think you owe that much to the pope.
Even counting HV, he’s still the worst Pope in centuries.
He should never have appointed the commission on contraception. During the time they were operating, millions of couples started using the Pill.
Destroyed the Roman Rite. Appointed WRETCHED bishops. Sent Jean Jadot to America, who recommended the absolute scum of the priesthood to be made bishops. Weakland, Clark, Hubbard, Bernardin, Roach, Malone, Hickey. On and on and on. All of them vicious enemies of the pro-life movement.
The only American bishop who unambiguously upheld HV was Patrick A. O’Boyle, Archbishop of Washington. Paul VI allowed the homosexual John Cardinal Wright to cut O’Boyle off at the knees. Wright’s homosexual secretary, Donald Wuerl, became a bishop, and has devoted himself for decades to coddling Dignity and defending pro-aborts’ right to receive Communion.
I don’t think Paul VI or any modern Pope is in hell! But I am opposed to canonizing Popes who were a disaster for the Church. The Papacy was their “state in life,” and official sainthood should be reserved for those who fulfilled the duties of their state in life, no matter how humble or exalted, not those who botched one thing after another.
Wait a minute!!!
We’ve been told that canonization DOES NOT CONCERN a Pope’s PAPACY—just his personal holiness!
I agree that canonizations recently have been too many, too fast and too casually vetted. You should still need two rigorously well-attested post-mortem miracles, and 50 years after the fellow's in the grave --- in my opinion.
But if it were not for Humanae Vitae, there would scarcely be a faithful Catholic left anywhere in the Church.
So I give my profound respect --- notwithstanding all your serious points --- to Pope Paul VI. To me, Humanae Vitae was the practical equivalent of raising the dead.
And his promulgation of Vatican II more than cancels out any positive that came from HV.
Pio, I am amazed at your curt, smack-down confidence in your own sweeping negative judgments. Who told you this revelation that the sin/crime of having convened the Second Vatican Council "cancels" the positives of Humanae Vitae? Are you a clairvoyant --- or a prosecutor --- in the sifting of souls? You sound more like "the Accuser of our Brothers" than a son/daughter of the Church.
I would not dare to anathematize you or Arthur or anyonew else --- let alone Pope Paul VI--- in this manner. If I thought my failures --- and they are many --- "cancelled" the work of the Holy Spirit in me, I would despair. I would not dare --- I would be terrified --- to measure by such a measure.
That statement is absolute hogwash. Will you say the same thing when Pope Francis finally comes to his senses and stops entertaining giving Holy Communion to adulterers?
Even a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day.
No need to be a clairvoyant. Just need to have one’s head out of the sand and look around at the fruits of Vatican II.
You keep cheering it on there girlfriend!
"I give a thought, too, to the dear Muslim immigrants that are beginning the fast of Ramadan, with best wishes for abundant spiritual fruits. The Church is near to you in the search for a more dignified life for yourselves and for your families. I say to you O scia! [trans.: a friendly greeting in the local dialect]."
Why is the Vicar of Christ associating Ramadan with "abundant spiritual fruits"? Why is he encouraging people in a mode of worship which denies the Divinity of Christ? This is not evangelization; it is ecumenism, and coming from the Vicar of Christ it is astounding. How is it possible to rationally equate such ecumenism with the example of St. Isaac Jogues?
As to the speculation that Pope Francis would reject St. Thomas More's defense of the King Henry VIII/ Queen Catherine marriage bond as a denial of 'mercy' --- again, this isn't even just sloppy casuistry, it's the most reckless kind of extrapolation. This argument does not demonstrate a diligent attention to accuracy and a fair evaluation of evidence.
Reckless extrapolation? Seriously?!!! Apparently you read my comment (intended to be a general analogy) in a literal sense.
The point I was attempting to make is that, based on public comments by the Pope regarding the Orthodox and remarriage and communion and his praise of Kasper's theology and talk of "mercy" in relation to the issue of divorce/remarriage/communion and the mixed messages that are emanating from him and from his inner circle, his standards are APPARENTLY more flexible than More's on the issue, with "mercy" as the basis. Perhaps I (and the many others who share the same interpretation) am wrong. Time will tell. However, at this point, there is certainly reason to wonder where things are heading.
I think you owe that much to the pope.
What the Pope owes to Christ and to His Church is "to pass on what he has received" in its entirety. He is spreading mixed messages and confusion, which is harmful to TRUE evangelization. I, and all Catholics, owe him our fervent prayers. Burying our heads in the sand is not a prerequisite.
My overall judgment is that the lamentable sequelae of Vat II were not “fruits” of Vat. II, but rather perversions thereof.
If it were just perversions then we would see changes being made by the heirarchy. Instead we have Francis talking about the “enormous fruits” of it.
Oh, it’s the new springtime of the Church BlatherNaut. We don’t need no stinkin pre-Vatican II church ways.
So putting the "perversions" aside, can you name a few tangible fruits of VC II?