Pope and saints

[henrikhankhagnell]

Pax et bonum!
The pope is the leader of the roman catholic church. If he is the leader of the church why aren't all Popes called Saint. Should roman catholics have a leader whom they believe is not a saint???!?

 

[winsome]

Pax et bonum!
The pope is the leader of the roman catholic church. If he is the leader of the church why aren't all Popes called Saint. Should roman catholics have a leader whom they believe is not a saint???!?

Catholics use the term Saint (with a capital "S") for those it recognises have led a life of exceptional holiness and are worthy examples for us to emulate. This can only be done in retrospect, usually many years after their death. Many Popes have been such people, some have not. Being declared a Saint is a reflection of their holiness of life not on their leadership abilities.

 

[mmmcounts]

Pax et bonum!
The pope is the leader of the roman catholic church. If he is the leader of the church why aren't all Popes called Saint. Should roman catholics have a leader whom they believe is not a saint???!?

Popes used to be automatically canonized by virtue of being pope. They stopped doing that at some point. See if you can find out when and why that happened.

 

[winsome]

In the early Church Saints were generally proclaimed as such by general acclamation. Many of them were martrys, particularly in the first 3 centuries.

Formal proceduresform seemed to have be put in place in the 10th century.

Not all early Popes were declared Saints. The first one not to be declared a Saint was Pope Liberius (352-66). The last Pope to be declared a Saint (according to the list in the Catholic Encyclopeida) was Pope Pius X (1903-14)

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

In the New Testament, the descriptor "saint" was given to every person who was converted to Christ. In the early church you were either a saint or an 'aint.

Somewhere along the line, as the church become formalised, the word "saint" became a descriptor for people whom the church viewed as special, who distinguished themselves above the normal believer. It was an invention of man, rather than something instituted by God.

I would be treading on shaky ground if I said the same thing about the word "pope". But there is no mention of it in the New Testament. The word was coined to describe the formal head of the Christian church when the bishop of Rome decided that the church came under his authority. The bishop of Constantinople objected, and they excommunicated each other. This was the start of the Great Schism. Both the Western and Eastern churches then asserted that they were the true church.

So, the question arises: Is the office of Pope and the institution of Saints a Scriptural office or an invention of man?

If the canonization of Saints an invention of man, what about all those people who pray to them? Who are they praying to? Figments of imagination? Or what?

 

[laconicstudent]

If the canonization of Saints an invention of man, what about all those people who pray to them? Who are they praying to? Figments of imagination? Or what?

Um, we are praying to our brothers and sisters in Christ, our God-bearing Fathers and hierarchs of the Church....

 

[winsome]

So, the question arises: Is the office of Pope and the institution of Saints a Scriptural office or an invention of man?

The office of Pope is a scriptural office.

A (Canonised) Saint is not an office.

 

[placidus]

Um, we are praying to our brothers and sisters in Christ, our God-bearing Fathers and hierarchs of the Church....

In our creed we state we believe in one God the father etc, and towards the end state 'and in the communion of saints', which pertains to those both living and dead, hence we are not addressing imaginative creatures. And, i might add, our protestant friends certainly do not come into agreement with this segment of the creed.....................peace

 

[ebia]

In the New Testament, the descriptor "saint" was given to every person who was converted to Christ. In the early church you were either a saint or an 'aint.

Somewhere along the line, as the church become formalised, the word "saint" became a descriptor for people whom the church viewed as special, who distinguished themselves above the normal believer.

Just to clarify, the Catholic Church uses the word in both forms. Which is not unreasonable given what the word means -holy, that is set aside for God. We can use that word meaningfully to refer either to all the People of God, and (in a different context) to refer to those people who's lives clearly demonstrated what it means to be set-aside-for-God.

 

[ShanksForte]

A "saint" is technically any baptized person living or dead (the communion of saints). So the pentecostal view of "we're all saints" isn't quite far off.

A Saint is technically anyone in heaven. That's why Angels are called Saints.

A canonized Saint is someone that, the Church has good reason to believe is in heaven and is able to mentor or otherwise intercede for us.

 

[Dark_Lite]

Popes used to be automatically canonized by virtue of being pope. They stopped doing that at some point. See if you can find out when and why that happened.

I'm gonna have to say that's not true. Where did you hear that?

In regards to the original post: there have definitely been some really corrupt popes in history. I'm sure a few of them went to hell for what they did. Those kinds of people aren't Saint material.

 

[luckyfredsdad]

The office of Pope is a scriptural office.

A (Canonised) Saint is not an office.

Could you please point out where, in scripture, the pope is even mentioned?
As an Anglican Catholic I was taught that saints were the Holy people of God and there are many popes of past years who I wouldn't rush to invite in to my home, never mind describe them as holy! John XII for instance or indeed Pius XII.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Could you please point out where, in scripture, the pope is even mentioned?
As an Anglican Catholic I was taught that saints were the Holy people of God and there are many popes of past years who I wouldn't rush to invite in to my home, never mind describe them as holy! John XII for instance or indeed Pius XII.

I'm not sure why you include Pius XII here as an example of papal unholiness. The most damning charges that Pope Pius XII has received have primarily centered on his alleged silence during WWII against the Nazi treatment of the Jews--a charge that has, by historians and scholars, Catholic, Jewish and otherwise, been contested. Some of Pius' most ardent defenders have, in fact, been Jewish historians and scholars, and most recently (as of 2009) Pius XII has even been nominated to be listed among the Righteous of the Nations at the Holocaust Museum.

Even if one could charge Pius XII with silence, he's no where near bad enough to be exemplified as an unholy pope.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[luckyfredsdad]

If I have done the man an injustice, I apologise, regarding his attitudes to the holacaust!
Even so, the Vatican after the war was seen and reported as, an escape route for the fascists. Further he supported Franco!

 

[winsome]

Could you please point out where, in scripture, the pope is even mentioned?

Do you mean the office of Pope or the word Pope?

The word Pope is not mentioned just as the word Trinity is not mentioned. The word is irrelevant.

However as Oscarr's original question and my reply concerned the office not the title I will assume you mean the office. The office is taught in Mt 16:13-20, Lk 22:31-32, Jn 21:15-17

As an Anglican Catholic I was taught that saints were the Holy people of God and there are many popes of past years who I wouldn't rush to invite in to my home, never mind describe them as holy! John XII for instance or indeed Pius XII.

You are at liberty to invite whomsoever you like into your home. As to John XII and Pius XII, neither has as yet been Canonised.

 

[winsome]

I'm not sure why you include Pius XII here as an example of papal unholiness. The most damning charges that Pope Pius XII has received have primarily centered on his alleged silence during WWII against the Nazi treatment of the Jews--a charge that has, by historians and scholars, Catholic, Jewish and otherwise, been contested. Some of Pius' most ardent defenders have, in fact, been Jewish historians and scholars, and most recently (as of 2009) Pius XII has even been nominated to be listed among the Righteous of the Nations at the Holocaust Museum.

Even if one could charge Pius XII with silence, he's no where near bad enough to be exemplified as an unholy pope.

-CryptoLutheran

Yes, Pius XII has been treated very unjustly

Never were the Jews and the Vatican so close as during World War II. The Vatican was the only place on the continent where they had any friends. The great Jewish physicist, Albert Einstein, who himself barely escaped annihilation at Nazi hands,stated in Time Magazine (December 23, 1940): “Being a lover of freedom, when the Nazi Revolution came in Germany, I looked to the universities to defend it, but the universities were immediately silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers, but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks. Then I looked to individual writers... they too were mute. Only the Church,” Einstein concluded, “stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing the truth... I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel great affection and admiration... and am forced thus to confess that what I once despised, I now praise unreservedly.”

See - Pius XII and the Jews during World War II

 

[placidus]

The Vatican was the only place on the continent where they had any friends. The great Jewish physicist, Albert Einstein, who himself barely escaped annihilation at Nazi hands,stated in Time Magazine (December 23, 1940): “Being a lover of freedom, when the Nazi Revolution came in Germany, I looked to the universities to defend it, but the universities were immediately silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers, but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks. Then I looked to individual writers... they too were mute. Only the Church,” Einstein concluded, “stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing the truth... I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel great affection and admiration... and am forced thus to confess that what I once despised, I now praise unreservedly.”

This is a great response and needs to be exposed more than it is, as the church is 'blamed' often in knee jerk fashion for compliance in atrocities of the past. While individual popes are certainly not 'saints' by their office, the pressure of historical situations (i.e. being sifted like wheat) affords them opportunity to become a saint.
Does the Vatican 2 church still abide by the codex of miracles to determine sainthood??......................................

 

[winsome]

This is a great response and needs to be exposed more than it is, as the church is 'blamed' often in knee jerk fashion for compliance in atrocities of the past. While individual popes are certainly not 'saints' by their office, the pressure of historical situations (i.e. being sifted like wheat) affords them opportunity to become a saint.
Does the Vatican 2 church still abide by the codex of miracles to determine sainthood??......................................

I don't know what you mean by the codex of miracles.

Apart from an investigation into the worthiness of a person's life, one miracle that is demonstrably a result of the candidates intercession is required for them to become Blessed, and two to become Saint.

 

[placidus]

Basically the same thing; the codex, i believe is like a listing of validations whether through intercessory prayer or some other miraculous intervention that leads to conclusion of sainthood.

 

[luckyfredsdad]

winsome;56160901]Do you mean the office of Pope or the word Pope?

The office is taught in Mt 16:13-20, Lk 22:31-32, Jn 21:15-17[quote/]

You must excuse me but the Office is not taught in Mt 16:13! It is simply the account of Peter's rehabilitation after his fall!




[quote/]You are at liberty to invite whomsoever you like into your home. As to John XII and Pius XII, neither has as yet been Canonised.

Of course I am, but neither of them would be invited! I notice however you have no comments on John XII?

Luckyfredsdad