Should Pope Paul John II really be considered as a saint?

On Sunday, May 1st 2011, hundreds of thousands of Catholics gathered in Rome for the beatification of John Paul II, the most charismatic pope of modern times.

Let me first explain what is meant by the beatification of those who may later be declared a saint. Beatification is a recognition accorded by the Catholic Church of a dead person's entrance into Heaven and capacity to intercede on behalf of individuals who pray in his or her name (intercession of saints). Beatification is the third of the four steps in the canonization process. A person who is beatified is given the title of ‘Blessed’. Since the Catholic Church reform of 1983, one miracle must be proven to have taken place through the intercession of the person to be beatified. However, this requirement is not necessary for those who died a martyr, as their sanctity is already evident because they were killed distinctly by others who have a hatred for the faith the victims believed in.

Pope John Paul II who died on the 2nd of April 2005, markedly changed previous Catholic practice of beatification. By October 2004 he had beatified 1,340 people, more than the sum of all of his predecessors since Pope Sixtus V (1585–1590), who established a beatification procedure similar to that used today. Pope John Paul’s successor, Pope Benedict XVI, removed the custom of holding beatification rites in the Vatican with the Pope presiding. Because of this, they can now be held in the location where the subject lived with the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints designated to preside over the ceremony as Papal Delegate.
Procedures with respect to the beatification of a prospective saint. In order to secure beatification (the most important and difficult step in the process of canonization) the regular procedure is as follows:

Procedures for beatification

To choose a vice-postulator by the postulator-general of the cause and to promote all the judicial inquiries necessary in places outside of Rome, such inquiries are instituted by the local Episcopal authority.

The preparation of the inquiries is carried on by the ordinary episcopal authority. They are of three kinds: (a) ‘Informative’ inquiries into the reputation for sanctity and miracles of the servants of God, not only in general, but also in particular instances; there may be several such inquiries if the witnesses to be examined belong to different dioceses. (b) Processes are instituted to prove that the decrees of Urban VIII regarding the prohibition of public worship of servants of God before their beatification have been obeyed; they are generally conducted by the bishop of the place where the relics of the servant of God are preserved. (c) Other inquiries are known as ‘Processiculi diligentiarum’ and have for their object the writings attributed to the person whose beatification is in question; they vary in number according to the dioceses where such writings are found, or are thought likely to be found, and may not be judicially executed before an "Instruction" is obtained from the promotor of the Faith by the postulator-general and by him sent to the bishop in question.

The results of all these inquiries are sent to Rome, to the Congregation of Rites, in charge of a messenger chosen by the judges, or by some other secure way, in case a rescript of the congregation dispenses from the obligation of sending a messenger.
They are opened, translated if necessary into Italian, a public copy is made, and a cardinal is deputed by the pope as ‘elator’or ‘onens’of the cause, for all which steps rescripts of the congregation, confirmed by the pope, must be obtained.

The writings of the servant of God are next revised by theologians appointed by the cardinal relator himself, authorized to so act by a special rescript. Meantime, the advocate and the procurator of the cause, chosen by the postulator-general, have prepared all the documents that concern the introduction of the cause. These consist of (a) a summary of the informative processes, (b) an information, (c) answers to the observations or difficulties of the promotor of the Faith sent by him to the Postulator.

This collection of documents is printed and distributed to the cardinals of the Congregation of Rites forty days before the date assigned for their discussion. If nothing contrary to faith and morals is found in the writings of the servant of God, a decree is published, authorizing further action, i.e., the discussion of the matter of appointment or non-appointment of a commission for the introduction of the cause.

At the time fixed by the Congregation of Rites an ordinary meeting is held in which this appointment is debated by the cardinals of the aforesaid congregation and its officials, but without the vote or participation of the consultors, though this privilege is always granted them by rescript.

If in this meeting the cardinals favour the appointment of the aforesaid commission, a decree to that effect is promulgated, and the pope signs it, but, according to custom, with his baptismal name, not with that of his pontificate. Thenceforward the servant of God is judicially given the title of Venerable.

A petition is then presented asking remissorial letters for the bishops outside of Rome, authorizing them to set on foot by Apostolic authority, the inquiry with regard to the fame of sanctity and miracles in general. This permission is granted by rescript, and such remissorial letters are prepared and sent to the bishops by the postulator-general. In case the eye-witnesses be of advanced age, other remissorial letters are usually granted for the purpose of opening a process known as "inchoative" concerning the particular virtues of miracles of the person in question. This is done in order that the proofs may not be lost and such inchoative process precedes that upon the miracles and virtues in general.

While the Apostolic process concerning the reputation of sanctity is under way outside of Rome, documents are being prepared by the procurator of the cause for the discussion de non cultu, or absence of cultus, (a system of religious rituals) and at the appointed time an ordinary meeting (congregatio) is held in which the matter is investigated; if it be found that the decree of Urban VIII has been complied with, another decree provides that further steps may be taken.

When the inquiry concerning the reputation of sanctity (super famâ) has arrived in Rome, it is opened (as already described in speaking of the ordinary processes, and with the same formalities in regard to rescripts), then translated into Italian, summarized, and declared valid. The documents super famâ in general are prepared by the advocate, and at the proper time, in an ordinary meeting of the cardinals of the Congregation of Rites, the question is discussed: whether there is evidence of a general repute for sanctity and miracles of this servant of God. If the answer is favourable, a decree embodying this result is published.

New remissorial letters are then sent to the bishops for Apostolical processes with regard to the reputation for sanctity and miracles in particular. These processes must be finished within eighteen months and when they are received in Rome are opened, as above described, and by virtue of an equal number of rescripts, by the cardinal prefect, translated into Italian, and their summary authenticated by the Chancellor of the Congregation of Rites.

The advocate of the cause next prepares the documents which have reference to the discussion of the validity of all the preceding processes, informative and Apostolic.

This discussion is held in the meeting called from the fact that it is only judges of the Rota who vote. If the difficulties of the promotor of the Faith are satisfactorily answered, the decree establishing the validity of the inquiries or processes is published.

Meanwhile all necessary preparation is made for the discussion of the question): Is there evidence that the venerable servant of God practiced virtues both theological and cardinal, and in an heroic degree? In the causes of confessors this step is of primary importance. The point is discussed in three meetings or congregations called respectively, ante-preparatory, preparatory, and general. The first of these meetings is held in the palace of the cardinal relator (reporter) of the cause, and in it only consultors of the Congregation of Sacred Rites, and with their chairman, or prefect, presiding, the third is also held in the Vatican, and at it the pope presides, and both cardinals and consultors vote. For each of these congregations the advocate of the cause prepares and prints official reports (positiones), called respectively report, new report, final report, concerning the virtues, etc.

In each case, before proceeding to the subsequent meeting, a majority of the consultors must decide that the difficulties of the promotor of the Faith have been satisfactorily solved.

When the Congregation of Rites in the above described general meeting has decided favourably, the pope is asked is asked to sign the solemn decree which asserts that there exists evidence of the heroic virtues of the servant of God. This decree is not published until after the pope, having commended the matter to God in prayer, gives a final consent and confirms by his supreme sentence the decision of the congregation.

The miracles now remain to be proved, of which two of the first class are required in case the practice of virtues in the heroic degree has been proved, in both ordinary and Apostolic inquiries or processes by eyewitnesses — three, if the eyewitnesses were found only in the ordinary processes; four, if the virtues were proven only by hearsay witnesses. If the miracles have been sufficiently proven in the Apostolic processes already declared valid, steps are taken at once to prepare the documents with regard to miracles. If in the Apostolic processes only general mention has been made of the miracles, new Apostolic processes must be opened, and conducted after the manner already described for proving the practice of virtues in an heroic degree. The miraculous cures have to be instantaneous and permanent.

The discussion of the particular miracles proceeds in exactly the same way and in the same order as that of the virtues. If the decisions be favourable, the general meeting of the congregation is followed by a decree, confirmed by the pope, in which it is announced that there is proof of miracles. It must be noted here that in the position of the preparatory congregation, there are required and subsequently printed, the opinions of two physicians, one of whom has been chosen by the postulator, the other by the Congregation of Rites. Of the three reports above mentioned, and which are now also required, the first is prepared in the usual way; the second consists of an exposition of the heroic virtues of the servant of God, an information, and a reply to later observations of the promotor of the Faith; the last consists only of an answer to his final observations.

When the miracles have been proved, another meeting of the Congregation of Rites is held in which it is debated once, and only once, whether or not, given the approbation of the virtues and miracles, it is safe to proceed with the solemnities of beatification. If a majority of the consultors be favourable, a decree to this effect is issued by the pope, and at the time appointed by him the solemn beatification of the servant of God takes place in the Vatican Basilica, on which occasion a pontifical Brief is issued permitting the veneration of the beatified person now known as Blessed.

Unfortunately, saint-making is intensely political. The impulse must first arise from the faithful but ultimately most saints are championed by religious groups that have organizational skills in hopes of keeping their organization and causes alive and increase their fundraising goals.

Is turning Pope Paul John II into a saint justified?

Now the question that is facing many people; many of who are Catholics is; “Should Pope Paul John II be considered as a saint?”

For one thing, Pope Benedict waived the traditional five-year wait and began the process just weeks after Pope Paul John II died. Critics across the Catholic spectrum have question that decision.

The Roman Catholic Church is still reeling from the fallout of sexual abuse scandals and for this reason, the religious celebration of the beatification of Pope Paul John II comes as a much needed reprieve. But is this kind of reprieve appropriate?

At his death six years ago, a popular movement began to virtually acclaim John Paul as a saint. An estimated four million pilgrims descended on Rome when Parkinson’s disease ended his 27-year pontificate, many of his mourners shouting “santo subito (sainthood now) at his funeral mass.

His successor, Pope Benedict XVI, agreed to fast-track the beatification, which declares John Paul “blessed” and is the last step before sainthood. He waived the five-year waiting period for starting the process after a candidate’s death.

The Vatican credited Pope Paul John II with a miraculous cure of a French nun who said her Parkinson’s disease disappeared after praying to John Paul II. Church-appointed doctors concluded there was no medical explanation for the cure. However there have been recent reports that Sister Marie never had Parkinson’s disease in the first place, that she was misdiagnosed and in actual fact, she had suffered from a different form of neurological illness that could have reversed itself without any form of miraculous intervention by Pope John Paul II or anyone else for that matter.

Here is the problem that is facing the current pope and the Vatican with respect to their loss of credibility when they chose to rush through the beatification of Pope John Paul II. Because Sister Marie is still alive, the doctors cannot really determine if whatever disease she was suffering from, won’t return again. If it does return after the pope was beautified, then the Vatican will have made a terrible blunder.

One of the prerequisites to being beatified is that the illness supposedly cured doesn’t return sometime during the lifetime of the victim whom the doctors claim was cured. The cure must be permanent. If it isn’t, then the beatification is a mistake. This is why the Vatican in the past insisted that the person who was cured, was eventually deceased before the beautification procedures were proceeded with. If Sister Marie’s supposed cure isn’t lasting and permanent, then the beautification of Pope John Paul II will become an albatross hung around the neck of Pope Benedict and the cardinals in the Vatican forever in the annals of the Church’s history.
For John Paul to become a saint, the Vatican will still have to declare that a second miracle has occurred. They may consider this next one that was proposed.

Christopher Lukasik was building shelves when a metal rod hit one of his eyes, tearing about a third of his optic nerve fibers and leaving everybody from his doctors to his family wondering whether he would ever see again. His 67-year-old Joanna Lukasik of Chicago, who grew up near the late pontiff's hometown of Wadowice, Poland, said, "I was driving to the hospital and I was begging him (the pope) and crying and begging him to save his vision and that's what happened." Doctors say he was lucky. Lukasik's mother says it was a miracle.

The chances of regaining vision after optic nerve fibers have been torn will depend upon how much the optic nerve fibers were damaged. The optic nerve fibers do not have the ability to regenerate themselves, so the damaged parts of the optic nerve fibers are lost permanently. Vision damage becomes greater relative to the part of optic nerve fibers that have been destroyed.

He may be able to see through that eye but that doesn’t necessarily mean that his vision was totally saved. When the optic nerve is damaged, the pupil will not constrict properly to adjust to the various intensities in lighting conditions. The optic nerve is a small disk behind the pupil of the human eye and when it is damaged it will cause the pupil to calcify, which means the light will have a harder time entering the eye. Damage to the optic nerve is irreversible.

Abnormal peripheral or side vision is another symptom of optic nerve damage. When it is damaged, the mobility of the pupil is severely limited.

If this man’s pupil can change in size based on the intensity of the light hitting it and the mobility of the pupil in his eye is not severely limited, then I am not convinced that the damage to his opting nerve fibers was that great.

To many Catholics, John Paul’s accomplishments during his time as their spiritual leader are reason enough for veneration. But that isn’t enough. There must be evidence of two miraculous cures brought about by two people praying to Pope Paul John II to intercede on behalf of the those persons that God cured because of the interceding of the person who is being considered as a saint.

Doubts have been raised about the nun’s miraculous recovery. How do we know that the nun actually prayed to the pope to intercede on her behalf so that God would cure her? What is to stop anyone who somehow gets better after being told that they are going to die soon and then claiming that it was their prayers to Pope Paul John that did the trick? Further, when someone said that they were cured after praying to the deceased Mother Theresa, Pope Paul John ordered that the Devil’s Advocate was not to investigate the claim.

Claiming to be cured by praying to Paul John would be one way of being famous, especially if it was your claim that you were cured because of your prayers or those of someone else to that particular pope that resulted in that pope being declared a saint. Would you believe it? The day after I wrote this paragraph, the construction worker I previously described is claiming that he was healed after his mother prayed to Pope Paul John II. Now the construction worker and his mother will be famous.

Admittedly, Pope Paul John II did some very good deeds when he was the pope. He helped unravel the Soviet Union by encouraging democratic movements in his native Poland. He took a firm stand against the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and made inter-faith dialogue a priority and was also the first pope to visit a mosque. He was also “the rock star pope,” making more than 100 foreign trips and holding massive outdoor masses. And in his final weeks, no longer able to speak, he could move large crowds with a simple wave or a pained expression.

Within the church, John Paul’s largely conservative doctrines were at times contested. But with the church struggling, most seem willing to overlook past differences and experience his beatification as a unifying moment, says Rev. Gilles Routhier, a theology professor at Quebec City’s Laval University.

The years since Pope John Paul’s death have been tumultuous ones for the church, presided over by a successor with none of his charisma.

Many have been appalled by reactionary signs; most notably Pope Benedict’s lifting of the excommunication of four fundamentalist bishops, one of whom denied the Holocaust. Relations with other faiths are also strained. He also refused to defrock an American priest who confessed to molesting numerous children and even served prison time for it, simply because the cleric wouldn't agree to the discipline. When Pope Benedict was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, following church law at the time, he turned down a bishop's plea to remove the priest for no other reason than the abuser's refusal to go along with it. He wrote; "The petition in question cannot be admitted in as much as it lacks the request of Father Campbell himself." That was what he wrote in a July 3rd, 1989, letter to Bishop Daniel Ryan of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois. This is the same man who would beatify his former superior who did nothing to stop the sexual abuse of children by the priests and brothers of the Church until it was too late.

Many will no doubt be reminded of this contrast in leadership at the beatification. But the ceremony also raises questions about John Paul’s role in the sex abuse scandals, many of which occurred under his watch.

“Is he not the pope who kept silent, or who didn’t take firm decisions, or who didn’t see or didn’t measure the gravity of things?” Routhier says, outlining the kinds of questions that might be asked.

When John Paul’s beatification was announced in January, the U.S.-based ‘Survivor’s Network of those Abused by Priests’ criticized what it described as a “hasty drive to confer sainthood on the pontiff under whose reign most of the widely documented clergy sex crimes and cover-ups took place.”

The sexual abuse of children and adolescents by priests speaks directly to John Paul’s poor management of the church, says Massimo Faggioli, assistant professor of theology at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota.

The late pope left the running of parishes to bishops he appointed, who were “known more for their obedience and silence than for their intelligence or courage,” Faggioli says. They had an interest in covering up sex abuse by parish priests, fearing it would reflect badly on their management skills and hurt their careers.

During his pontificate, Pope John Paul clearly overlooked the sex abuse by his priests, and other Catholic religious leaders. He did not pay attention to what was going on around him and gave too much power to cardinals and bishops.

He even turned a blind eye and covered his ears to the statements of the current pope, Pope Benedict who has also been criticized for his handling of sex abuse allegations when, as Cardinal Ratzinger, he was John Paul’s enforcer of Catholic doctrine. In that capacity, the current pope ordered the bishops world-wide to not inform the authorities that their priests were sexually abusing the children under their care.

The most disturbing case is that of Mexican priest Marcial Maciel Degollado, a drug addict who ran the powerful Legion of Christ, a staunchly conservative movement that had John Paul’s firm backing.

Father Maciel, as he was commonly known, died in 2008. He was accused of abusing at least nine seminarians and of fathering several children with different women, one of whom says she was his common-law wife for 21 years. He also channeled large sums of money to the Vatican, part of it from the selling of private audiences with John Paul for as much as $50,000.

The allegations were widely reported in the Mexican press. The nine seminarians also wrote to the Vatican about their ordeal. Yet the Vatican didn’t act until after John Paul’s death. It was only in 2006 that Pope Benedict removed Maciel from public ministry.

The troubled Church that the current pope now heads is very much the product of his predecessor, the pope he chose to beautify. Is it conceivable that Pope Benedict is hoping that his successor will do the same thing for him when he goes to meet his Maker? He is the one who is left cleaning up mess of the pope who exacerbated the sexual abuse problem and whom he had later chose to beatify.

If he was really smart, he would have stayed away from beatifying a pope who was certainly not an appropriate choice to make into a saint. If Pope Paul John II is chosen to be a saint by the Catholic Church, will any of the thousands of sexually abused children whose abusers were the Catholic priests and brothers in the churches and schools they attended, pray to their newly appointed saint?

Imagine if you will, a child being sexually assaulted and a stranger who witnesses the assault and who should be coming to the aid of the stricken child but instead is merely standing around and doing nothing. Who will the child call upon for help, the stranger standing next to him or the police officer in the distance? Will he call upon Pope Paul John II or make his or her plea directly to God?

If Pope Paul John II is named as a saint by the Vatican, who should the faithful Catholics call upon to intercede on their behalf if the need arrives? Perhaps they will pray to Pope Paul John II or maybe any of the many other saintly people who deserved the accolade of being named as a saint more than Pope Paul John II does.

He may have been seen as a man of heroic virtue but what was unseen during his reign as pope was his errors in judgment. Pope Paul John II, in my opinion was a man who makes me believe that some saints are really dead sinners whose lives have been revised and edited to make them into what they really were not; saintly material.

The Church’s sex scandals may have not been a turning point in the Church’s history but they have certainly accentuated trends which were already under way such as the shrinkage and declining prestige of the celibate priesthood in the west; the hostility of secular opinion; the breakup of Catholic Ireland and the declining participation in church attendance.

Pope Benedict XVI is convinced that it is the modern world that is out of step with reality. Are all these developments inevitable or will there be some other turning point? I believe that the canonization of Pope John Paul may be another turning point that will do more harm than good since many devoted Roman Catholics are suspicious of Pope Benedict’s real motives. In other words, will the canonization of Pope John Paul really erase from the minds of the faithful that much of the sexual abuses of Pope John Paul’s priests and the cover-ups of his bishops and archbishops were done under his watch?