January 2003 Print

Frs. Bernard Lorber & Jean-Michel Gleize

In discussing the canonizations of Pope John Paul II, we are well aware that so doing we touch upon an extremely delicate matter which, by a natural desire for peace and concord, we would prefer not to have to address. If there is one area in which we could have willingly followed the Pope, it is in the fight against the current neo-protestant tendency to desacralize divine worship. Nevertheless, we have been compelled to take note over the years not only of the astonishing increase in the number of beatifications and canonizations that have taken place, a point to which we shall return later, but also of the choice of subjects, which has often resulted in the pairing of persons who were doctrinally opposed. The beatifications of Pope Pius IX and Pope John XXIII in 1999 is among the most flagrant examples of this. The canonizations within a few months of each other of Padre Pio and Jose Escriva de Balaguer are also of a nature to trouble a mind that operates according to the principle of non-contradiction.

In the present essay we make no pretense of deciding the matter, for we lack the competence to do so. Undoubtedly, one day the Magisterium will provide guiding lights different than those provided by Rome today, and then will issue clarifications about certain cases of dubious beatifications and canonizations.¹ May the reader not be scandalized by this affirmation implying a relativity in the Church's Magisterium. It is not the Magisterium itself which is relative, but only the understanding of it by those who exercise it today. For today the understanding of the concept of tradition admits of such flexibility that what is understood in one way today might be understood in the opposite way tomorrow. This having been said, we think it is possible to consider the infallibility of the current canonizations while maintaining our adherence to the common doctrine.

In order to avoid any misunderstanding, let us make it clear that we have no intention of trying to examine particular acts of canonization to see which would be valid and which would not be. To reiterate, that is beyond our competence. Our reflection is of a different order, it bears upon the spirit and the intention in which these canonizations are being made by the authority today. Therefore none should be angered if our consideration encompasses the canonizations of persons whose holiness has already be publicly proven by miracles and extraordinary, well-known deeds, as is the case for Padre Pio, for whom the intervention of the Magisterium was merely to sanction the vox populi. So as to proceed in an orderly way, we shall begin by defining certain notions, which will lead us to consider the traditional teaching on canonization. Then we shall examine the canonizations that have taken place since Vatican II in order to reach some conclusions which can be the starting point of further thought and not definitive judgments.

Traditional Doctrine ²

History

A glance at history enables us to get a better grasp of the reality of canonization. At the beginning, one finds the spontaneous practice of a public cultus rendered to the dead, expressing the people's belief in a person's holiness and setting forth his virtues as an example. The first cultus was given to the holy martyrs. The people would gather the relics of these victims of persecution, and build altars on their tombs where the priests would celebrate the Mass. The first examples reach back to the 2nd century, and by the 3rd century the practice was universal. The cultus had to be authenticated by the bishop: the discipline distinguished between proven martyrs and those who were not.

It was only after the 4th century that canonization was extended to those who, while not having been called upon to shed their blood, had become illustrious by their eminent virtues. The discipline remained unchanged: it was the bishop's place to authenticate holiness, but, especially after the 11th century, the popes required that, for greater certitude, the inquiry into virtues and miracles be conducted in the context of a council, and preferably a general council. It is not clear what the juridical status of this official recognition was, whether it constituted beatification or canonization, but it stands to reason that it only concerned beatifications since a bishop's authority does not go beyond the limits of his diocese.³ "The cultus did not attain the dignity of a canonization until, having passed from diocese to diocese, it extended to the universal Church, with the assent, either express or tacit, of the Sovereign Pontiff."⁴ In other words, if the bishop alone can conduct a beatification, then the discipline observed implies that the pope alone is endowed with the necessary authority to conduct a canonization.

Finally, a decree of Pope Alexander III (1159-81), dated 1170, inserted in the Corpus Juris Canonici,⁵explicitly set the disciplinary rule: the faculty of decreeing beatifications in their dioceses was withdrawn from the bishops and reserved to the Sovereign Pontiff; and therefore, all the more so, canonization properly so-called remains the prerogative of the Sovereign Pontiff. The practice, of course, was not immediately nor in every point in conformity with this principle, and the bishops often considered Alexander III's decretal a dead letter.

The controversy was definitively settled by the decrees of Urban VIII, dated March 13, and October 2, 1625, first promulgated at Rome and then published with a special confirmation in the bill Coelestis Jerusalem Gives, of July 5, 1634. From this moment, it is beyond contesting that, in fact and by right, only the Sovereign Pontiff can declare beatifications and canonizations. We should remark that in exercising this promulgation, the pope can have recourse to the assistance of councils convened to adequately inform the legislator. One such type of council was regularly convened to conduct inquiries, and the result of its proceedings was formal canonization, which can be defined as the sentence that terminates a process regularly initiated and pursued with all possible rigor in following the established procedure for establishing the heroism of the virtues practiced by a servant of God and the reality of the miracles by which God has manifested this heroism. This sentence is ordinarily rendered by the Supreme Pontiff in the course of a special solemnity.

There has always been, in the course of history, the spontaneous veneration of popular piety: when the pope is content to ratify it, it is known as an "equivalent" canonization. This is defined as a sentence which does not conclude a process of canonization, but which the Sovereign Pontiff renders in order to ratify a cultus to a servant of God which has existed from a distant past. It is necessary that the heroic virtues and miracles of this servant of God, while not established by an official investigation, be related by a reliable historian and the fame of his miraculous intercession uninterrupted. This judgment is considered to have been rendered when the Holy See imposes as a precept on the universal Church the celebration of the Mass and the recitation of the office in honor of the saint.⁶ It is in this category of canonization that are to be classed most of those accomplished before 1170, and it is in this category that figure the doubtful cases.⁷

It is certain that no bishop was ever able to proceed to veritable canonizations; for the power to prescribe that a member of the faithful be honored as saint in the universal Church by a public cultus can not and never could revert to one who possesses a jurisdiction limited to a diocese or a province, but it must belong solely to the one who has power over the universal Church.

 

What Is "Canonization"?

Definition

Canonization is the decree of judgment and the declaration of that judgment by which the Sovereign Pontiff, pronouncing a definitive judgment, inscribes a previously beatified servant of God in the catalogue of the saints. By this act, the pope declares that the person just placed on the altars truly reigns in eternal glory, and he orders the Church to render him in every place the cultus due to the saints.⁸ The author of canonization is the head of the Church. Since it is a matter that concerns eternal salvation and the common good of society, only the legitimate authority has the power to promulgate the law in this domain. Canonization is tantamount to a threefold supreme and definitive judgment in which the Church authoritatively affirms: 1) that the person in question is in eternal glory and has, during his life, practiced the supernatural virtues to a heroic degree; 2) that this practice constitutes for the Church's faithful a norm so sure that by conforming themselves to it, they will be assured of reaching eternal salvation; 3) that every one of the faithful is obliged to give his assent to judgments 1) and 2), and to profess his assent by taking part in the public veneration that the Church will henceforth render to the saint canonized in official recognition of his heroic virtues. The saint is given as an example because of his virtues. By the cultus that is rendered to him, it is, through his person, really the eminent grace, which is an intimate participation in the divine nature, that we venerate.

 

Canonization and Beatification

Canonization and beatification are alike in that their end, the object, and author are the same, and in law, in both cases there is a judgment which declares the heroic virtues of the saint or blessed. They differ in that in beatification a definitive judgment is not made, for it is a reformable act that prepares the way for the judgment of canonization, whereas the latter judgment is irreformable. Beatification is not a precept, but a permission, whereas canonization is a precept, and hence constitutes an obligation. Beatification is not a law obliging the universal Church, but rather is a privilege granted to a part of the Church (an ecclesiastical province, diocese, city, religious family), whereas canonization constitutes a law the observance of which is prescribed for the entire Church.

 

Infallibility

1) Beatification is not an infallible act. When considering the beatifications that the bishops accomplished before 1170, it is beyond doubt that they are not stamped by infallibility, for in law these are acts which issue from a subject who can never be personally infallible. In fact, history shows us that errors have been made.⁹ As regards beatifications made after 1170, which were reserved exclusively to the Apostolic See, it is likely that these are not infallible either: these acts are neither definitive nor prescriptive; whereas infallibility can only be attributed to a definitive or prescriptive act.¹⁰ By definition, the privilege concerns a matter that is not necessary. Canonizations can be of two kinds: equivalent and formal, in which the latter offer more guarantees than the former, and consequently the refusal to give them the assent that is their due would constitute a greater fault,¹¹ without, however, attributing infallibility to beatification. The argument from universality must also be taken into account: beatification does not impose the cultus of the blessed on the universal Church. But the infallible acts of the Magisterium must extend to the universal Church.

2)  Canonization. As regards the infallibility of canonization, the almost universal ensemble of theologians up to Vatican Council I teach that the pope, when he canonizes a saint, enjoys the prerogative of papal infallibility. On this point we note especially St. Thomas,¹² Melchior Cano,¹³ and Benedict XIV.¹⁴ First of all, there is the argument from right: it is not possible for the pope to err in canonizing a reprobate, because that would be tantamount to teaching something contrary to faith and morals, and the pope would then be teaching that a person can be saved by imitating the example of someone who, by his bad actions, has been damned. There is also an argument from right that Benedict XIV underscores: no errors have ever been found in the canonizations to which the popes have proceeded.¹⁵

3)  Value of this infallibility. The common opinion of theologians and a certain tradition in the Church consider canonizations to be infallible, but it is not a solemnly denned dogma. A person who denied the infallibility of canonization could not be considered a heretic.

4)  The case of the martyrology. The inscription of a person in the martyrology does not signify his canonization. The martyrology is the list that includes not only canonized saints, but also servants of God who were beatified either by the Sovereign Pontiff, or, before 1170, by the bishops.¹⁶ The titles of sanctus or beatus do not have the same precise meaning in the martyrology which would allow distinguishing between canonized and beatified saints. And these beatifications are not infallible.¹⁷

 

The Object of Canonization

First and foremost, a person's personal holiness and heroic virtues make the saint. Miracles are only secondary, as they bear witness to the supernatural heroism of the saint's virtues. The supernatural aspect of miracles and extraordinary deeds is not evoked for its own sake, but to attest to the divine origin of the virtues and to manifest the eminent degree of sanctifying grace. For it is in this that holiness consists: it consists in the possession of sanctifying grace to an extraordinary degree, such a high degree of divine charity that it is accompanied by infused and acquired virtues practiced to the height of heroism. The heroism of virtues is, so to speak, the thermometer of holiness: where there is a real saint, there is also heroic virtue, and where the virtues are practiced to a heroic degree and no virtue is lacking, there is holiness. Since grace cannot be perceived by the senses, the judgment of holiness is based on the heroism of virtue.

Since the infused virtues are interrelated–unlike faults–a saint's spiritual organism will comprise the ensemble of the moral virtues to an eminent degree. The least fault in the infused moral virtues will be the sign that in the person concerned there is not a consummate degree of sanctifying grace.

Nevertheless, the grace of charity infinitely exceeds the natural condition common to all men: it is a gratuitous gift that nature can never demand as something proper to itself. Concerning the obtaining of supernatural salvation, St. Thomas remarks that,

the good that is proportionate to the common state of nature is to be found in the majority; and is wanting in the minority. The good that exceeds the common state of nature is to be found by the minority, and is wanting in the majority.¹⁸

The same conclusion can well be made about holiness and the heroic virtue it implies that St. Thomas reaches when speaking of supernatural salvation:

Since their eternal happiness, consisting in the vision of God, exceeds the common state of nature, and especially in so far as this is deprived of grace through the corruption of original sin, those who are saved are in the minority. In this especially, however, appears the mercy of God, that He has chosen some for that salvation from which very many in accordance with the common course and tendency of nature fall short.¹⁹

There are two reasons why holiness–and hence canonization, which gives it in example–is something rare: one is the absolute transcendence of grace in relation to nature, and the other is the corruption of original sin. And we can add a third reason. The holiness that is recognized by canonization takes on the value of an example. Now, what is given as an example must attract the attention, and in order to do that must present something of the singular, of the extraordinary according to the etymology of the word. Contemporary language has, moreover consecrated this truth by assimilating the two qualifiers exemplary and unique. That is why multiplying the number of saints amounts to lessening their exemplariness: were saints numerous, then only a small number of them, and not the majority, should be canonized.

We can conclude that holiness, the basis of every canonization, is an extraordinary state of supernatural life, extraordinary in the sense of being well beyond the common way.

 

Contemporary Canonizations

The essence of canonization compels us to ask two questions: 1) What was the conception of holiness that existed before Vatican II, and what is it today; and what model of holiness is being proposed to the faithful of today.

The Notion of "Holiness" Since Vatican II

A Quantitative Change

Let us begin with the fact that has been pointed out by many observers: relatively recently, the number of beatifications and canonizations has attained unprecedented levels. The following list gives a precise idea:

16th century: 1 canonization ceremony with 1 saint

17th century: 10 canonization ceremonies with 24 saints

18th century: 9 canonizations with 29 saints

19th century: 8 canonizations with 80 saints

• Leo XIII (1878-1903): 4 canonizations with 18 saints

20th century:

• Pius X (1903-14): 2 canonizations with 4 saints
  
• Benedict XV (1914-22): 2 canonizations with 3 saints
  
• Pius XI (1922-39): 17 canonizations with 34 saints
  
• Pius XII (1939-58): 21 canonizations with 33 saints
  
• John XXIII (1958-63): 7 canonizations with 10 saints
  
• Paul VI (1963-78): 20 canonizations with 81 saints
  
• John Paul II (1978-2002): Escriva de Balaguer is the 468th person canonized by the Pope.

 

Until Paul VI and John Paul II, canonizations were solemn acts of the Roman Pontiff that remained exceptional. Since Vatican II, this has been less and less the case. John Paul II has carried out more canonizations than all his predecessors of the 20th century combined plus all of his predecessors since the creation of the Congregation for Rites by Sixtus V in 1588.

John Paul II, himself, explained this increase in the number of canonizations in a discourse to the cardinals of the consistory of June 13, 1984:

Sometimes it is said that today there are too many beatifications. But besides reflecting the reality that, by the grace of God, is what it is, this also corresponds to the express desires of the Council. The Gospel is so diffused in the world and its message has so deeply taken root that it is precisely the large number of beatifications which reflects in a vital manner the action of the Holy Spirit and the vitality that He causes to spring forth in the domain the most essential for the Church, that of holiness. For it is in fact the Council that has spotlighted in a special way the universal call to holiness.

Hence this quantitative change is caused by a qualitative change. If canonizations are henceforth more numerous, it is because the holiness to which canonizations attest possesses a different signification: "holiness" is no longer something rare, extraordinary, but something common.

John Paul II has carried out more canonizations than all the popes of this century. But in this way the dignity of canonizations is not preserved. If canonizations are numerous, they cannot be, we do not say valid, but esteemed, nor be the object of veneration of the universal Church...If the canonizations increase, their value diminishes.²⁰

 

A Qualitative Change

Let us try to explain, according to the logic of Vatican II, why holiness is no longer something extraordinary. The "new theology" will enable us to understand.

1) Foundations of the new conception of "holiness"

The Second Vatican Council introduced a new religion linked to a new theology, and according to this new theology (as explained by the ordinary pontifical teaching of John Paul II) redemption is conceived of as a simple existential testimony allowing men to become interiorly aware or conscious of their own dignity as human persons:

Christ, the Redeemer of the world, is the one who penetrated in a unique, unrepeatable way into the mystery of man and entered his "heart." Rightly therefore does the Second Vatican Council teach: "...Christ...in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of His love, fully reveals man to himself and brings to light his most high calling."²¹

...If we may use the expression, this is the human dimension of the mystery of the redemption. In this dimension man finds again the greatness, dignity and value that belong to his humanity... .If this profound process takes place within him, he then bears fruit not only of adoration of God but also of deep wonder at himself. How precious man must be in the eyes of the Creator, if he "gained so great a Redeemer,"²² and if God "gave his only Son" in order that man "should not perish but have eternal life."^{23 24}

Since the mission of the Church consists in applying the fruits of the Redemption, the Church will have for her essential goal promoting this dignity of the human person and making all men become aware of it:

In reality, the name for that deep amazement at man's worth and dignity is the Gospel, that is to say: the Good News. It is also called Christianity. This amazement determines the Church's mission in the world....²⁵

In various passages in its documents the Second Vatican Council has expressed the Church's fundamental solicitude that life in "the world should conform more to man's surpassing dignity"²⁶ in all its aspects, so as to make that life "ever more human."²⁷...In the name of this solicitude, as we read in the Council's Pastoral Constitution, "the Church...is at once a sign and a safeguard of the transcendence of the human person."^{28 29}

Now, the dignity of the human person is based on freedom of conscience; it is hence this that the Church is going to strive to show forth and defend:

For this reason the Church in our time attaches great importance to all that is stated by the Second Vatican Council in its Declaration on Religious Freedom....The Declaration on Religious Freedom shows us convincingly that, when Christ and, after Him, His apostles proclaimed the truth that comes not from men but from God...they preserved, while acting with their full force of spirit, a deep esteem for man, for his intellect, his will, his conscience and his freedom. Thus the human person's dignity itself becomes part of the content of that proclamation, being included not necessarily in words but by an attitude towards it....[T]he Church, because of her divine mission, becomes all the more the guardian of this freedom, which is the condition and basis for the human person's true dignity.³⁰

To live the fruits of this redemption will then mean to act in such a way that one becomes "increasingly conscious of the dignity of the human person" and that "more and more people are demanding that men should exercise fully their own judgment and a responsible freedom in their actions...."³¹ The one who lives a holy life then is one who has an acute consciousness of the dignity of the human person and who respects it by celebrating man's liberty, especially in religious matters.

St. Thomas says that holiness is expressed in the highest in the exercise of the worship by which man renders to God what is due Him.³² The new holiness corresponds logically to a new worship, the worship of man, of which Pope Paul VI spoke³³; worship by which the Church renders to man the dignity that is due him by fostering his liberty. The holy man, in the new meaning of the term, is the tolerant man. Tolerance is substituted for the theological virtue of charity, and becomes the primordial virtue that serves as the basis of the new holiness, according to Vatican II and Dignitatis Humanae.

Let us add that the new saint is not only the tolerant man, but also the man who propagates the natural virtues. The "new" holiness loses its relation to the supernatural, and is often reduced to the pursuit of human causes, which is the logical consequence of the naturalistic conception of the new religion. During the canonization of Zdislava of Bohemia on May 21, 1995, this new conception was brought out clearly:

Holiness consists in the capacity to give of oneself to others and to welcome life.

Her example appears eminently contemporary, especially in relation to the value of the family which, as she teaches us, must be open to God, to the gift of life, and to the needs of the poor. Our saint is an admirable witness of the "gospel of the family" and of the "gospel of life" which the Church, more than ever, strives to spread in this passage from the second to the third Christian millennium.

Families of Bohemia, families of Moravia, inestimable treasure of this nation, become what you are in God's plan by following the example of your saints! And you, Zdislava of Lemberk, guide the families of your country and of the world towards knowledge of their mission; make them open to the gift, O thou, mother gentle and strong, charitable and pious.³⁴

2) This new conception explains why holiness is something common, ordinary. To be holy henceforth means to attain this revelation according to which Christ the Redeemer manifests man to man himself. Holiness consists in a raising of consciousness, and it suffices for a man to become a saint to discover what he already is in Christ. There is nothing more than a simple passage from the implicit to the explicit, which reduces to nothing all transcendence. Holiness is no longer an ideal that surpasses the common condition of mankind. On the contrary, it is situated in the logical prolongation of this condition since it is nothing else but the consciousness of this condition in what constitutes its dignity.

Taking the principle declared above by St. Thomas and applying it to this new situation, one must say that holiness, being the good proportionate to the common state of nature, is to be found in the majority, and is wanting in the minority.³⁵

It follows that holiness, if it is the object of canonization, is no longer given as an example to imitate, but as a sign. There is a difference between the two: An example to imitate is addressed to the intellect and the will; it indicates something that does not yet exist and that must be achieved. In the traditional concept of holiness, canonization is thus defined as a law that indicates what are the heroic virtues to be acquired in following the example of the saint. The sign is directed to the pure intellect, and it indicates what is already, but which is not yet grasped perfectly: it manifests it more perfectly.

With the new conception of Vatican II, holiness becomes a sign: those who have already become aware or conscious of the dignity of their human nature and defend it are pointed out to others so that they, too, can in turn attain this consciousness. "Holiness is the greatest testimony of the dignity conferred on a disciple of Christ."³⁶

The Second Vatican Council has significantly spoken on the universal call to holiness.³⁷...The vocation to holiness must be recognized and lived by the lay faithful, first of all as an undeniable and demanding obligation, and as a shining example of the infinite love of the Father that has regenerated them in his own life of holiness.³⁸

With such a perspective, it becomes useful to multiply the signs, since this multiplicity itself acquires the value of a sign: the sheer weight of number of those who are conscious of their dignity confers a greater efficacy to the revelation in which Christ reveals man to man himself. The more canonizations there are, the more saints there are, the better is signified the dignity of man.³⁹

 

"Holiness" for Today's Faithful

Even if the example of heroic virtues is not excluded, the example given in the canonizations corresponds to new virtues in keeping with the Council's vision: holiness becomes one of the elements which coincide with ecumenical unity. Still more, some saints of acknowledged virtue are used to diffuse the message of the Council: this is what we would call the "instrumentalization" of canonizations, that is to say, the use of one thing (in this case true holiness) to serve extraneous ends.

 

The Example of Ecumenism

Ecumenism is the sieve through which all the causes for canonization must pass, a little like the Secretariat for Christian Unity was, during the Council, the filter through which all the conciliar documents had to pass. Thus, not only are certain causes promoted or lives of saints explained in a new context, but others are stopped for ecumenical reasons. One striking example, but which made little noise thanks to the discretion exercised by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, was the halt put to the cause of Isabel the Catholic in 1992. The bishops of Valencia, Seville, and Avila had pressed the Congregation to advance her cause in order to reach a beatification in 1992 for the fifth centenary of the discovery of America. So as not to offend the Jewish community, the cause was stopped by "the Catholic artisans of Jewish-Christian dialogue. Others had to intervene as well, most officiously the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity (to which are attached relations with Judaism), the Secretariat of State, and, probably, John Paul II himself."⁴⁰

The ecumenical spirit shows through particularly when the person to be canonized comes from a region with a non-Catholic majority. Canonization is used as a means to establish a bridge towards the other religions. Or better still, we have been able to attend ecumenical re-readings of the lives of saints already canonized. Thus St. Brigit of Sweden becomes a focal point for the unity of Lutherans and Catholics:

It is a great joy for me to know that in Sweden she is loved and venerated by the Lutherans as well as by the Catholics. Her life and work constitute a heritage that unites us. St. Brigit is like a center of unity. "Lord, show me the way and dispose me to follow it." These are the words of one of her prayers that is still recited in Sweden....This invocation can constitute the program of an ecumenical movement. Ecumenism is a voyage that we take together, of which it is not possible to map the route or the duration. We do not know if the way will be easy or difficult. We only know that it is our duty to make this journey together....St. Brigit consecrated her entire existence to the divine, ardent desire for reconciliation and communion among all the members of the Christian people....⁴¹

Following the festivities of the sixth centenary of St. Brigit's canonization, he addressed the cardinals in these terms:

The recent assembly (synod of the European bishops) was characterized by the presence of fraternal delegates of the divers Christian confessions which, on an equal footing, took part in the work. The meetings, colloquies, and common prayers–I would like to recall in particular the ecumenical liturgy that took place at the Vatican basilica on December 7–highlighted the need to pursue ecumenical dialogue in the quest for unity and communion....It will be this ecumenism of truth and charity that will make of Christians credible prophets of hope and of solidarity in the eyes of the world. On this difficult path, may the patron saints of Europe help us: St. Benedict, St. Cyril, St. Methodius. Especially, may St. Brigit intercede for us, she whose sixth centenary of canonization we have recently celebrated. This anniversary took on a special significance, constituting an important step in the ecumenical dialogue. The example of this saint and the memory of the mission she accomplished in the service of the Church's unity represent a motive of encouragement for all those who are engaged in the new evangelization of Europe.⁴²

In a homily pronounced in 1995 at Kosice (Slovakia), during the canonization of three martyrs, John Paul II evoked "the martyrs of the other religious confessions":

Dear brothers and sisters! Today's liturgy invites us to reflect on the tragic events of the early 17th century, emphasizing, on the one hand, the senselessness of violence relentlessly visited upon innocent victims, and, on the other hand, the splendid example of so many followers of Christ who were able to face sufferings of every kind without going against their own consciences. Besides the three Martyrs of Kosice many other people, also belonging to Christian confessions, were subjected to torture and suffered heavy punishment; some were even put to death. How can we fail to acknowledge, for example, the spiritual greatness of the 24 members of the Evangelical Churches who were killed at Presov? To them and to all who accepted suffering and death out of fidelity to the dictates of their conscience the Church gives praise and expresses admiration....

The use of the term "martyr" is equivocal and leads to confusion. Martyrdom is defined as dying as a witness to the true faith, which presupposes an eminent degree of charity. One cannot speak of martyrs in a false religion because of the interdependence of truth and charity; someone who bears witness to a false religion cannot be, objectively, a martyr. This does not take away from the personal merits of people who suffer in their flesh to defend their faith, albeit objectively false. Moreover, it is possible that they might really be martyrs if they died to defend a point of Catholic faith; nevertheless, in such cases the Church cannot declare them martyrs, for she cannot be the judge in this matter, which is in the internal forum. Benedict XIV explains that these persons are martyrs before God, and will receive the reward of martyrdom, but they are not martyrs before the Church, which cannot declare them such. It is quite clear that such a case cannot occur unless the person is in a state of invincible ignorance vis-a-vis the true faith.

The major point of theology seems to have been completely forgotten, as a passage from the same homily confirms:

I also referred to this martyrologium⁴³ in my Apostolic Letter Tertio Millennia Adveniente, urging that it be brought up to date after the horrendous experiences of this past century and made complete with the names of the martyrs who have opened our way to the new millennium of Christianity (cf. §37). Martyrdom unites us with all those believers in Christ, both in the East and in the West, with whom we still await the attainment of full ecclesial communion (cf. §34).

He invokes again "respect for the rights of minorities":

I wish therefore to express my joy at having been able to add these new names today to the martyrology of the Church in Slovakia, and I am confident that this act will serve to encourage all the sister Churches, especially those of Central and Eastern Europe.

The three new saints belonged to three different nations, but they shared the same faith and, sustained by that faith, they were united also in facing death. May their example renew in their fellow citizens of today a commitment to mutual understanding and may it strengthen especially between Slovaks and the Hungarian minority the bonds of friendship and cooperation! Only on the foundation of mutual respect for the rights and duties of majorities and minorities can a pluralistic and democratic State endure and flourish.....

A few other citations illustrate the ubiquity of the ecumenical theme mixed with that of holiness:

The witness to Christ borne even to the shedding of blood has become a common inheritance of Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans and Protestants, as Pope Paul VI pointed out in his Homily for the Canonization of the Ugandan Martyrs. (Tertio Millennio Adveniente, §37)

It was at the same time an ecumenical pilgrimage: first to the sanctuary of the martyrs of the Anglican Church, then to the temple constructed in honor of St. Charles Lwanga and his 21 Catholic companions. (General audience of Feb. 18, 1993)

In the memorandum already cited, on the theme of preparation for the great Jubilee, I underlined the opportunity it presents to constitute a contemporary martyrology that takes into account all the local Churches, this also in an ecumenical dimension and perspective. There are so many martyrs in the non-Catholic Churches: the Orthodox in the East, but also the Protestants. (Allocution to the Extraordinary Consistory of June 13, 1994)

This ecumenism of saints is only the consequence of the new notion of holiness. For Christ the Redeemer works the salvation and holiness by revealing to men the dignity of their condition, which is based on the liberty of the conscience: the fundamental principle is no longer the truth to which man freely adheres, it is no longer the object to which the individual conscience submits; it is the liberty of the human conscience which is the subject. Now, man's individual conscience is what makes one man believe that God is what He is not for another man. A man professes some religion and in this profession he is always respectable, because he celebrates his transcendental interiority. Consequently, all the religions become means of salvation, because they are as many possibilities of expression of the dignity acquired for man by Christ: "Christ is thus the fulfillment of the yearning of all the world's religions and, as such, he is their sole and definitive completion."⁴⁴

The man who freely professes his religion, and who is conscious of the dignity that this free profession confers on him, such is the saint. And every man can be holy with this kind of holiness in every religion: fully in the Catholic religion, and in a partial, but nevertheless real way, elsewhere:

The Council states that the Church of Christ "subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him," and at the same time acknowledges that

many elements of sanctification and of truth can be found outside her visible structure. These elements, however, as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, possess an inner dynamism towards Catholic unity.⁴⁵

It follows that these separated Churches and Communities, though we believe that they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and value in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church.⁴⁶

...To the extent that these elements are found in other Christian communities, the one Church of Christ is effectively present in them. For this reason, the Second Vatican Council speaks of a certain, though imperfect, communion....⁴⁷

There is then a communion of holiness that transcends the different religions, and this transcendence manifests the redemptive action of Christ and the effusion of His Spirit on all humanity, thus preparing the way to perfect ecumenical unity.

Perhaps the most convincing form of ecumenism is the ecumenism of the saints and of the martyrs. The communio sanctorum speaks louder than the things which divide us.⁴⁸

In the radiance of the "heritage of the saints" belonging to all Communities, the "dialogue of conversion" towards full and visible unity thus appears as a source of hope. This universal presence of the Saints is in fact a proof of the transcendent power of the Spirit. It is the sign and proof of God's victory over the forces of evil which divide humanity.⁴⁹

Albeit in an invisible way, the communion between our Communities, even if still incomplete, is truly and solidly grounded in the full communion of the Saints–those who, at the end of a life faithful to grace, are in communion with Christ in glory. These Saints come from all the Churches and Ecclesial Communities which gave them entrance into the communion of salvation.⁵⁰

What is the point of canonization? It can only be as the means to which the Catholic Church has recourse in order to signify to the world the dignity of the human condition as it manifests itself within her bosom. Canonization corresponds to a primordial model in which the different religious confessions can participate more or less fully.

 

Saints Who Convey and Fulfill the Message of the Conciliar Religion

In certain beatifications and canonizations, the real aim cannot be the setting forth of the heroic virtues of the persons in question since it is clear that they did not reach the level of the heroic, but rather it is the definitive consecration of the Second Vatican Council as "the new Pentecost of the Church" or else one of the Council's principal themes. Such is the case in the beatification of John XXIII, the introduction of the cause of Paul VI, and the canonization of Josemaria Escrivá de Balaguer.

1) The beatification of John XXIII. The cause of John XXIII is inseparably presented with that of the Council and its new message:

This pontiff promoted ecumenism, acted to maintain fraternal relations with the Eastern Orthodox he had known in Bulgaria and Istanbul; fostered more "intense" relations with the Anglicans and with the world of Protestant churches. He set everything in motion to establish the bases of a new attitude in the Catholic Church towards the Jewish world, making a decisive opening to dialogue and cooperation. On June 4, 1960, he created the Secretariat for Christian Unity. He promulgated two important Encyclicals, Mater et Magistra (May 20, 1961) on social evolution in light of Christian doctrine, and Pacem in Terns (April 11, 1963) on peace between all the nations of the world. He visited hospitals and prisons, and showed himself to be near, by charity, to all the suffering and poor in the Church and in the world.⁵¹

Excepting his devotion to corporal works of mercy, all the virtues of John XXIII were "ecumenical" virtues. In his sermon for Pentecost 2001, Pope John Paul II rendered homage to John XXIII on the occasion of the 38th anniversary of his death:⁵²

The Second Vatican Council, announced, convoked, and opened by Pope John XXIII, was conscious of this vocation of the Church. One can well say that the Holy Spirit was the protagonist of the Council from the moment the Pope convoked it, declaring that he had welcomed as coming from above an interior voice that imposed itself upon his spirit. This "gentle breeze" became a "violent wind" and the conciliar event took the form of a new Pentecost. "It is, indeed, in the doctrine and spirit of Pentecost," affirmed Pope John, "that the great event which is an ecumenical council draws its substance and its life" (Discorsi, p. 398).⁵³

In the homily of the Mass of beatification, the principal paragraph concerning John XXIII equally evokes the prophet of the Council:

The stream of novelties that he introduced did not, certainly, involve doctrine, but rather the manner of explaining it: new was his way of speaking and acting, new was the swell of sympathy with which he approached ordinary people as well as the powerful of the earth. It was in this spirit that he convoked the Second Vatican Council, thanks to which he opened a new page in the Church's history: the Christians felt themselves called to announce the gospel with renewed courage and with greater attention to the "signs of the times." The Council was truly a prophetic intuition of this aged Pontiff, who inaugurated, in the midst of numerous difficulties, an era of hope for Christians and for mankind.⁵⁴

This "new way of speaking and acting" is well related by Yves Marsaudon, notorious Freemason, who, in his work Ecumenism According to a Traditional Freemason, relates his frequent and friendly contacts with Msgr. Roncalli, then apostolic nuncio at Paris. This "new way of speaking and acting" does not proceed from John XXIII's temperament or personal style, but rather from his way of approaching the world (taken in the Gospel sense of the word), the enemy of Jesus Christ, and those who are of the world. Marsaudon confides how Msgr. Roncalli had expressed reservations at the time of the promulgation of the dogma of the Assumption based on an ecumenical "prudence": "He perpetually thought of 'others' and of the effect that such or such innovation might have upon the separated Christians."⁵⁵

2) The introduction of the cause of Paul VI. For John XXIII, the promoters of his cause strove to emphasize his legendary goodness; one should rather speak of his natural affability⁵⁶ or his lack of prudence, to which we shall return later. For Paul VI, there is no such thing. Paul VI was neither appreciated nor admired–not by his friends, and still less by his enemies. Yet his cause was introduced May 11, 1993, at the request of the Italian Bishops' Conference: this is another proof of "instrumentalization."

During the announcement of the introduction of the process, Cardinal Ruini, vicar of the Pope for the diocese of Rome, gave an evocation of the personality of Paul VI which leaves no doubt as to the intentions for such an elevation to the altars; it is a question of exalting his work, the reform born of the Council:

The city of Rome, this city-diocese that is unique in the world by its history and its mission, by its universality and by its specific problems, which had him for bishop and successor to Peter for 15 years, well knows what it owes to Paul VI. The fruits of his universal and Petrine ministry affected it above all. After receiving the heritage of John XXIII, Paul VI, in guiding the final sessions of Vatican Council II and by conducting it happily to term, took upon himself the duty of inscribing it in the Church's structure, of spreading and applying conciliar decisions. Rome was enriched by new pontifical dicasteries responding to the pastoral exigencies indicated by the Council, and to the expectations of the world in rapid evolution and on the march towards greater unity. The Church underwent the apprenticeship of a new way of choral prayer in the course of the sacred liturgy, of a new spirit in the judgment of the world, of new relations with the faithful of other Churches and Christian confessions, with our elder brothers, the Jews, with non-Christians, and with non-believers. The Church deepened its new relation with the holy Books, by her missionary effort, Marian devotion, culture, art, science. Paul VI was the initiator of great missionary voyages which carried him and his successor John Paul II to the centers of the world's communities and even to the assemblies of the highest levels of society, in order to bear witness to the love of Peter for man and for universal peace.⁵⁷

The will to canonize Pope Paul VI arises from higher causes, the "cause" par excellence, the cause of the Second Vatican Council, and in order to promote it, the canonizations of John XXIII and Paul VI are the means of choice.

3) The canonization of Josemaria Escrivá. As has been shown elsewhere [English readers can refer to the article by Nicholas Dehan, Opus Dei: A Strange Pastoral Phenomenon, published at the time of his beatification] the canonization of Msgr. de Balaguer is in strict relation to the Council in the measure that, ideologically, Balaguer was a precursor of the Council. In a short biography published on the Vatican web site, one reads:

When John XXIII announced his decision to call an Ecumenical Council, Blessed Josemaria began to pray and get others to pray for the happy outcome of this great initiative of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, as he wrote in a letter in 1962. As a result of the deliberations of the Council, the Church's solemn Magisterium was to confirm fundamental aspects of the spirit of Opus Dei, such as the universal call to holiness; professional work as a means to holiness and apostolate; the value and lawful limits of Christian freedom in temporal affairs; and the Holy Mass as the centre and root of the interior life. Blessed Josemaria met numerous Council Fathers and experts, who saw him as a forerunner of many of the master lines of the Second Vatican Council. Profoundly identified with the Council's teaching, he diligently fostered its implementation through the formative activities of Opus Dei all over the world."

 

Consequences of the New Conception of "Holiness"

 

Lack of Concern for Doctrinal Orthodoxy

Doctrinal orthodoxy was a determining criterion in the old procedure, to such a degree that the least suspicion would immediately halt a cause, even if the person seemed to have lived all the virtues heroically. What can be said, then, of John XXIII, who fell silent whenever papal infallibility was at issue,⁵⁸ or of the beatification of Cardinal Ferrari, Archbishop of Milan, who was so lacking in vigor in opposing modernism in his diocese that Pope St. Pius X had to intervene and correct him? It is well known that Cardinal Ferrari, whose pride was wounded, would never admit that modernism was thriving in his diocese and even in his own seminary. He publicly defended newspapers tainted with modernism, and even went so far as to dispute Pope St. Pius X's decisions in front of his seminarians.⁵⁹...[see "95 Years Ago: Modernism Condemned," The Angelus, Nov. 2002–Ed.]

These processes for canonization pose a real problem when the doctrinal rectitude of their subjects is considered.

 

The Deficiencies of the Procedure

These can be identified in two ways. One approach is to examine the changes made in the procedure itself.... Another way is by means of anecdote, showing the irregularities that have been observed. For instance, the miracle attributed to Mother Teresa⁶⁰ has raised a storm of controversy in the medical community in India; the doctors claim that the cancerous tumor of Monika Bera was treated at a hospital. Indeed, if the illness had been treated by doctors, it would not be possible to declare the healing, even unusually sudden, a miracle without contravening the rules of the procedure, which exclude from consideration the case of a sick person treated by doctors. Moreover, even if there were a true miracle, it is not clear that it can be attributed to the intercession of Mother Teresa, for shortly before the healing, a miraculous medal had been touched to the patient.⁶¹

What can be said for the so-called heroic virtues of John XXIII? Several voices have been raised, on the progressivist side as well as on the traditional side, to remind the authorities not to confuse heroic charity with the "goodness" that proceeds from an easy-going temperament or, sometimes, even from weakness. We refer the reader to studies that have been made on this subject and which all converge on the same conclusion: it seems impossible to speak of the heroism of his virtues.⁶²

Conclusion

1) For the Church of Vatican II. what is "holiness"? This is the question at the heart of the problem with the new canonizations. The aspects we have examined reveal to us a new conception of holiness. The new notion influences the Church and her members to such a point that the idea of what holiness really is fades little by little from the Catholic people, and also from the clergy and religious communities. The wave of departures from the priesthood and religious life which followed on Vatican II is a revealing indicator.

2)  The Pope's intention is decisive for determining the infallibility of his acts. In what measure does Pope John Paul II want to accomplish veritable canonizations bearing the mark of infallibility? The different indicators gathered from his speeches and homilies tend to show that his intention no longer is the same as that of his predecessors.

3) In the context of the current confusion in the Magisterium. a simple examination of facts cannot be sufficient to determine the Pope's intention. But if one considers his work as a whole, one is obliged to observe that he has always been reluctant to invoke infallibility (as, for example, in the affair of the document refusing ordination to women). How can the Pope will to oblige the body of the faithful to accept the simultaneous placing on the altars of Padre Pio and Msgr. Balaguer? The latter encouraged, and in certain domains, preceded, the reforms of the Council, fatal for the Church; the former spurned them.⁶³ By convoking the Council, John XXIII introduced into the Church, with great pomp, liberalism and modernism; Pius IX condemned them.

4) We do not doubt the heroism of the virtues of some of the persons canonized by Pope John Paul II. But it is necessary to recognize that they were sanctified and that they reached an extraordinary degree of grace and virtue by the traditional means. The spirituality in which a Padre Pio was sanctified is the most radical antithesis of the New Mass of Paul VI.⁶⁴ The fact that a Padre Pio was canonized in the course of the New Mass leads to the confusion of minds. The utilization of sound and holy causes to the benefit of the preaching of the new religion is another one of Satan's master strokes.⁶⁵

Translated from the Society of Saint Pius X's bi-monthly review Nouvelles de Chretienté (No. 77, Sept.-Oct. 2002), exclusively for Angelus Press.

Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, a Frenchman, a graduate of the French Ecole Nationale des Chartes, was ordained in 1996 at Ecône, and has been professor of philosophy and theology at the seminary there ever since.

Fr. Bernard Lorber, a Frenchman, was ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre on June 29, 1988. In Germany for seven years and in Belgium for six (where he formed the Schola Bellarmina), he is now the editor of the news bureau of the Society's headquarters, publishing the weekly bulletin DICI and the bi-monthly Nouvelles de Chrétienté.

 

---

1. Since only canonizations are considered by the theologians as infallible, our study bears directly on these. However, given that the same spirit animates both canonizations and beatifications, we shall occasionally use certain examples of beatification.

2. Benedict XIV, De Servorum Dei Beatificatione et de Beatorum Canonizatione,Book 1, Ch. 39.

3. Such is the advice given by Benedict XIV, ibidem, Ch. 10:

4. Ortolan, "Canonisation," Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholique (DTC), Vol. 4, col. 1632.

5. Decretals, Book 3, Title 45, Ch. 1.

6. For example, the canonization of St. Wenceslas, Duke of Bohemia and Martyr, (d. 929) whose office was imposed on the universal Church by Benedict XIII on March 14, 1729; or that of St. Margaret, Queen of Scotland (d. 1093), whose office was imposed by Innocent II on Sept. 15, 1691.

7. The most famous case is that of Charlemagne. The Antipope Pascal III, who had opposed the legitimate pope, Alexander III, at the urging of the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, inscribed Charlemagne in the catalogue of the saints on December 29, 1165. But no public cultus had until then been rendered to this prince. This canonization, the work of an antipope, was never either officially approved or reproved by the Holy See. The authors are divided on this subject. Benedict XIV thinks that no necessary condition is wanting in order for there to be, not a formal canonization, but an equivalent beatification. (De Servorum Dei, Bk. 1, Ch. 9, §4.)

8. Cf. Bellarmine and Benedict XIV.

9.Benedict XIV, De Servorum Dei, Bk. 1, Ch. 42, §6-7.

10. Proof of this minor: The final cause of infallibility is to assure the unity of the faith; but the unity of the faith, which is the common good of the entire ecclesial community, must be assured by a definitive and prescriptive act.

11. Benedict XIV, De Servorum Dei, Bk. 1, Ch.42, §9-10. Let us remember that "not infallible does not mean worthless." Certitude admits of degrees, and the title of blessed calls for our respect.

12. Quodlibet IX, Q. 8, Art. 16. St. Thomas speaks of the final cause of infallibility: "To teach every truth that concerns the things necessary to salvation." Canonizations are a case in which the law concerns matters necessary to salvation: "The honor that we render to a saint equals a certain profession of faith when we affirm the saint's glory." The pope who canonizes a saint indirectly expresses the divine right, and in this capacity, his act will be infallible.

13. De Locis Theologicis, Bk. 5, Ch. 5, Art. 3, conclusion 3.

14. Benedict XIV, De Servorum Dei, Bk. 1, Ch. 43.

15. Ibid., Bk. 1, Ch. 44. St. Thomas says in the ad 2 of the Quodlibet cited, "Divine Providence preserves the Church so that in these matters she not be deceived by the fallible testimony of men."

16. Benedict XIV, ibid. History of the Martyrology: cf. the Tractatio de Martyrologio Romano of Baronius at the head of the chapter of Benedict XIV, chapters 4-9. The first author was Eusebius of Caesarea, who wrote in Greek and was translated into Latin by St. Jerome. After this first list came numerous addenda.

17. Ibid.

18. Summa Theologica, I, Q. 23, Art. 7, ad 3. St. Thomas gives in support of what he says the following example: "Thus it is clear that the majority of men have a sufficient knowledge for the guidance of life; and those who have not this knowledge are said to be half-witted or foolish; but they who attain to a profound knowledge of things intelligible are a very small minority in respect to the rest."

19. Ibid. St. Thomas is then a partisan of the thesis of the small number of the elect. One must clarify that this small number is small relatively: the elect and the saints are less numerous than the damned and sinners, but for being less numerous if they are compared to the latter, the elect and the saints can be very numerous taken absolutely In the Apocalypse, St. John contemplates the multitude of the elect and says that this crowd is innumerable. "Turbam magnam quam dinumerare nemo poterat" (7:9). Cf. the commentary on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, Ch. XII, lesson 2 (on verse 5).

20. Romano Amerio, Stat Veritas, sequel to Iota Unum, gloss 39 on §37 of the Apostolic Letter Tertio Millennia Adveniente, p. 117.

21. Gaudium et Spes, §22.

22. Exsultet from the Paschal Vigil.

23. John 3:16.

24. Redemptor Hominis, §§8, 10. Moreover, this idea of John Paul II merely repeats the original idea expressed in the Constitution Dei Verbum of Vatican II:

It is certain that in revealing himself this way to us, in this call that he addresses to us, God reveals us to ourselves; it is in answering this call that man emerging from the light of God wonderously discovers the greatness of his own being. The supreme revelation of God to which the New Alliance is essentially linked is also the total revelation of human nature. (Henri de Lubac, "Commentary on the Proemium of the Constitution," in Vatican II: Texts and Commentaries on the Conciliar Decrees, Unam Sanctam 70a, p. 164.)

25. Redemptor Hominis, §10. "The Church's specific task, that which founds its absolute necessity, is the unveiling of a reality already present at the heart of the world and especially at the heart of man, the reign of God, in order that man may explicitly know the gift of God." (Jean-Guy Page, Qui est I'Eglise? [Who Is the Church?] Vol. 1: Le Mystere et le sacrement du salut [The Mystery and the Sacrament of Salvation], p. 215.)

26. Gaudium et Spes, §91.

27. Ibid., §38.

28. Ibid., §76.

29. Redemptor Hominis, §13.

30. Ibid., §12.

31. Dignitatis Humanae, §1.

32. II-II, Q. 81, Art. 8.

...it is by sanctity that the human mind applies itself and its acts to God: so that it differs from religion not essentially but only logically. For it takes the name of religion according as it gives God due service in matters pertaining specially to the Divine worship, such as sacrifices, oblations, and so forth; while it is called sanctity, according as man refers to God not only these but also the works of the other virtues, or according as man by means of certain good works disposes himself to the worship of God.

33. Paul VI, Speech Closing the 4th Session of Vatican II, December 7, 1965.

34. Extract from the sermon pronounced during the Mass that preceded the canonization, Documentation catholique, July 2, 1995, No. 2119.

35. Whence the leading idea of Lumen Gentium, the universal vocation to holiness (Ch. 5). Universal vocation is to say that it concerns in fact, as in principle, the whole People of God without making a distinction between common holiness and the heroic holiness in which would be found perfection properly so-called.

36. Christifideles Laici, § 16.

37. Lumen Gentium, Ch. V, §§39-42.

38. Christifideles Laici, §§16-17.

39. This is the reflection of Dom Ghislain Lafont in his book Imaginer  l'Eglise Catholique (Cerf, 2001), note 1, p. 232:

It is gladdening to note that the authors of the new Catholic encyclopedia Theo have devoted the first volume of the work to holiness ("Seekers after God by the Thousands") and from the beginning they precede without stating it to a kind of spontaneous beatification: "Today, who doesn't know Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Helder Camara, Fr. Pierre, Oscar Romero, etc., and, already a bit more distant, Edmond Michelet, Tom Dooley, Madeleine Delbrel, Teilhard de Chardin? These men and women are like a focal point for the whole human race." Further on, they add other names of persons some of whom have since been beatified by the Pope.

40. Article by Michel Kubler and Claude Dial published in La Croix-L'Evenement of March 28, 1991, reprinted in Documentation catholique, April 21, 1991, No. 2026.

41. The continuation of the sermon is interesting:

Today as in that epoch, the Lord continues to raise up generous men and women who advance the same design of unity among the believers in Europe and in the world. As I affirmed on June 9, 1989, during the ecumenical ceremony at Uppsala: "We cannot do everything all at once, but we must do today what we can, in the hope of what we shall be able to do tomorrow. The Mixed Commission on Dialogue between Catholics and Lutherans is also working in this direction, in the hope of contributing to suppress the obstacles that still block the unity of Christians." Extracts from the homily pronounced during the ecumenical celebration at St. Peter's, Rome, on Oct. 5, 1991, on the occasion of the Sixth Centenary of the Canonization of St. Brigit of Sweden in the context of an exceptional ecumenical event held in St. Peter's Basilica at Rome, uniting Lutheran pastors and the Catholic hierarchy. Cf. Documentation catholique, November 17, 1991, No. 2038.

42. John Paul II, Speech to the Cardinals and the Roman Curia, Dec. 23,1991, cited in Documentation catholique, Feb. 3, 1992, No. 2043.

43. The ecumenical martyrology.

44. Tertio Millennio Adveniente, §6.

45. Lumen Gentium, §11.

46. Unitatis Redintegratio, §3.

47. Ut Unum Sint, §§10-11.

48. Tertio Millennio Adveniente, §37.

49.  Ut Unum Sint, §84.

50. Ibid.

51. Discourse of praise addressed to John Paul II by the Prefect for the Congregation of the Causes of Saints, L'Osservatore Romano, Dec. 20-21, 1999.

52. It was on this occasion that the mortal remains of the deceased pope were exposed on St. Peter's square, and after the ceremony, were escorted in procession before the altar of the Confession of the Vatican basilica to be exposed to the veneration of the faithful for several days.

53.Documentation catholique, July 1, 2001, No. 2251.

54. Ibid., Oct. 1, 2000, No. 2233.

55. Yves Marsaudon, L'oecumenisme vu par un francmacon de tradition (Editions Vitiano), p. 46. It is interesting to note that the title of the fifth chapter is "The Death of a Saint." It is about John XXIII...

56. "Out of place attitudes, of which one could multiply in abundance the anecdotes, confirm Jean Guitton's judgment of an apostolic nuncio who was both 'familiar' and 'vulgar,'" reports Yves Chiron in his article on John XXIII in Certitudes, new series no. 3, citing facts that are, indeed, disedifying.

57. Speaking of his work at the Roman Curia as pro-secretary of Pius XII, Cardinal Ruini said:

It was 35 years of indefatigable apostolate, of which the traces are deeply inscribed in our City as in the history of the Church. His devotion in his service to the popes saw him engaged in diplomacy, which he exercised as an authentic work of charity, with scrupulous care.

The cardinal well keeps himself from speaking of the scrupulous care with which John Baptist Montini hid the relations that he was nurturing with Moscow, despite the pope's formal interdiction. This single act of grave disobedience to the pope should suffice to stop the process of beatification.

58. Marsaudon, "L'oecumenisme, p. 45.

59. The refusal of a few seminarians to swear the anti-modernist oath. The interesting details of the great debate that was front-page news throughout Italy at the time are provided in the Disquisitio: Conduite de saint Pie X dans la lutte contre le modernisme, (Publications Courrier de Rome, 2002), pp. 157-218. [For a description of this work, see The Angelus, Nov. 2002.]

60. It was recognized by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints on Oct. 2, 2002.

61. The testimony of the young Indian woman was reported by Saverio Gaeta for the Italian Catholic weekly Famiglia cristiana, Oct. 10, 2002.

62. The most detailed study appeared in the journal Tradizione cattolica (published by the Italian district of the Society of Saint Pius X). Another study showing that the goodness of John XXIII was in reality only a lack of the virtue of prudence appeared in the Italian review Rassegna de Ascetica e Mistica "S. Caterina da Siena," July-Sept. 1975. The author, Fr. Colosio, is an Italian Dominican of S. Miniato convent, near Pisa. This article was translated into French and published in the Sel de la terre, No. 42. Lastly, let us mention a good article that appeared in the review Certitudes, No. 3 (new series) entitled Jean XXIII: La beatification malheureuse.

63. In 1966, the Father General of the Capucins asked Padre Pio:

"Padre, I came to recommend to your prayers the special chapter for the new Constitutions..." He had scarcely gotten the words "special Chapter" out of his mouth when Padre Pio made a violent gesture and cried out: "that is all nothing but destructive nonsense."...A few weeks later when the pope was going to receive the Capuchin chapter in audience, Padre Pio wrote to Paul VI: "I pray the Lord that [the Capuchins] continue their tradition of seriousness and of religious austerity, of evangelical poverty and the observance of the rule and the constitutions." When the new constitutions were announced, Padre Pio had the same fiery reaction: "What are you up to at Rome? What are you plotting? You even want to change the rule of St. Francis!" (Source: Fr. Jean, OFM, cap., Letter to the Friends of St. Francis, No. 17, Feb. 2, 1999.)

64. Cf. The Problem of the Liturgical Reform (English version: Angelus Press).

65. We cite the message published by the Mexican Bishops' Conference explaining the profound meaning of the canonization of Juan Diego by Pope John Paul II:

This canonization renders equally palpable the providential love of the Church and of the Pope for the indigenous people and reiterates their firm opposition to the injustices, violence and abuses of which this people has been victim through the centuries....By this canonization the Pope encourages the indigenous peoples of Mexico and of all America to conserve this healthy pride in the culture of their ancestors, and supports the legitimate aspirations and the just demands of all the natives. The life of Juan Diego must give a new lift to the construction of the Mexican nation: a nation first of all ready to be reconciled with its origins, its history, its values, and its traditions; then a nation whose development would be founded upon the worth of the human person, respected in his integrity; a nation in which the meeting of diversity and of communion would take place in creativity; a nation where the laws could not only protect the rules of life in society, but equally assure justice and solidarity; a nation, finally, where the dignity of the most vulnerable would be defended and where the more well off would be able to give free rein to their fraternity. Documentation catholique, No. 2276, Sept. 15, 2002.