The debate over canonizing two popes

The debate over canonizing two popes


              John Paul II and John XXIII

The double canonization Sunday of two popes, John XXIII and John Paul II, is a first in church history, and it’s prompted a debate among commentators: Has the church rushed too fast to declare John Paul a saint, especially in view of his record on clerical sex abuse cases? Is the addition of John XXIII to the canonization roster merely a political balancing act by Pope Francis? And should popes be canonized at all – is it really possible for the church to make a dispassionate judgment on the holiness of men who sat on the throne of Peter and were called “Your Holiness” in life?

The record-setting speed of John Paul II’s canonization does, indeed, raise some questions. The “Santo subito!” (Sainthood now!) banners in St. Peter’s Square at the funeral of the Polish pope reflected the sentiments of many faithful who thought his deep spirituality, evangelizing energy and strong defense of human rights made him a saint for our times.

Yet what pushed his cause through so quickly was support at the highest levels of the hierarchy. At that same funeral, the man who would be elected as John Paul’s successor, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, told the faithful: “We can be sure that our beloved pope is standing today at the window of the Father’s house, that he sees us and blesses us.” In effect, that’s like declaring someone a saint – all that was left was to make it official. And to speed things up, Pope Benedict waived the normal five-year waiting period to begin the sainthood process.

As time has passed, however, and the contours of the sex abuse scandal have become more defined, John Paul’s record has come in for criticism. In particular, critics have focused on the Polish pope’s long support for the late Father Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legion of Christ, who was later unmasked as a sexual abuser of his own seminarians, a man who led a double or triple life, kept mistresses and fathered children. For decades, the Vatican turned a blind eye to accusations against Maciel; John Paul’s defenders have always said the pope was not aware of the evidence against Maciel. That was the line taken last week by Monsignor Slawomir Oder, the priest who guided John Paul’s sainthood process. Oder told reporters the Vatican saintmakers had investigated the Maciel case and concluded: “There is no sign of a personal involvement of the Holy Father in this matter.”

It should not be forgotten that John Paul II was the pope who established harsh penalties for priests who sexually abused minors, approved changes that made it easier to defrock abusive priests and denounced such abuse as an “appalling sin” and a crime.

The debate over John Paul’s record on sex abuse revolves on issues of governance and management, and here is where the Vatican and critics seem to be on different pages. Most people view canonization of a pope as a canonization of his pontificate. But in recent years, the Vatican has repeatedly suggested that sainthood for a pope is more about personal holiness than papal job performance. In that sense, declaring Pope John Paul a saint is not the same as endorsing every decision he ever made, or his management style. He is being held up to the faithful as someone who lived the Christian virtues in an extraordinary way, not necessarily as “Pope John Paul the Great.” As Pope Benedict once put it, “Holiness does not consist in never having erred or sinned.”

The decision to canonize John XXIII at the same time reflects several factors. First, Pope Francis is clearly inspired by John XXIII’s pastoral style of governance, his direct style of communication and his emphasis on mercy over doctrine. As Massimo Faggioli points out in his excellent new book, John XXIII: The Medicine of Mercy, both John and Francis came from poor families and brought with them to the Vatican an emphasis on the church’s attention to the poor and suffering.

A primary factor in Pope Francis’ decision is the Second Vatican Council, which is celebrating its 50th anniversary. By adding John XXIII, who convened the council, Pope Francis moved the focus of this canonization away from John Paul II and toward Vatican II.

Some have portrayed the move as a political one, aimed at balancing the “liberal” John XXIII, who opened the church to the world, and the “conservative” John Paul II, who pulled the church back to more traditional practices and identity. I think that’s a partial reading. While it’s true that John Paul set some limits to the innovations that followed Vatican II, he also embodied those changes in ways that upset Catholic traditionalists: he celebrated liturgies that often adopted non-Roman elements; he wrote hard-hitting encyclicals on social and economic justice, critiquing capitalism; he built bridges to science, endorsing the theory of evolution and saying the church had erred in condemning Galileo; he was the first modern pope to visit a synagogue and pray in a mosque; he presided over mea culpa ceremonies apologizing for past wrongs, including the excesses of the Inquisition and the crusades, and the moral failings of Christians during the Holocaust. In short, there’s plenty of evidence that, in many ways, John Paul II embraced the spirit of Vatican II.

In canonizing two diverse protagonists of the Second Vatican Council, I think Francis is trying to move past the interpretive battles over Vatican II, and is saying that sainthood is bigger than differences in papal policies.

One of the arguments against canonizing popes is that process turns into the hierarchy canonizing itself. Certainly, a papal sainthood cause brings with it a lot of political baggage, and there’s a risk that Vatican factions might use canonization to silence criticism of a previous pope.

Ironically, it was John Paul II who wanted more “ordinary” saints, and for years he tried to get the Vatican’s saintmakers to find lay people and married couples to canonize. This weekend, however, the sainthood spotlight is shifting back to the top of the hierarchy.

3 comments (Add your own)

1. kag1982 wrote:
Well, at least they found a pope who they are going to canonize faster than John Paul II. (And you know exactly who I am talking about.)

I think that there are going to be many more "pope saints" going forward. I think that this has absolutely nothing to do with Vatican II and absolutely everything to do with the advent of modern communications technology. Even the faithful who never meet the Pope in real life have a connection to him through television and the Internet. John XXIII was one of the first popes who people could see when they turned on the news. John Paul II invented the modern papacy and was pope for the advent of 24 hour cable news and the Internet. Now there is a pope who tweets daily, whose Masses are all broadcast on a Youtube channel, and who is the most talked about person on the Internet. One of the most important aspects of sainthood is having a cult and modern popes because of their global reach have a huge cult. Leo XIII may have been a very holy man, but he didn't have a Twitter account to pick up devoted followers like Francis does.

Of course, having a please personality is important in the new media world. Both John XXIII and John Paul II had pleasing personalities. John XXIII essentially comes off as a cuddly teddy bear in footage of him. John Paul II was the movie star of the Church; he was great at playing "pope." Even living in the modern communication age doesn't mean a pope will be made a saint. Benedict XVI is a shy academic; I doubt that he would have a huge following after his death.

Thu, April 24, 2014 @ 8:27 PM

2. will wrote:
And, on the other side, John XXIII is "liberal" in only a very specialized sense of the word. He was, after all, a man of deeply traditional piety, a lover of Latin and of the classical mass whose 1962 typical edition bears his name, and, above all, like Benedict XVI, a stylist in every sense of the word, donning happily the papal tiara, embracing all of the regal finery and ceremonial of "Romanitas": he, like Benedict XVI after him, resurrected the ermine mozzetta (that very same garment that Pope Francis has sworn off as the supreme antithesis of his papal style), and along with it the camauro, the Capello Romano, the papal fanon.

Fri, April 25, 2014 @ 8:16 AM

3. Gemma Rivera wrote:
The Church canonizing its hierarchy is actually pretty rare. Of the 78 popes made saints, only 2 of them happened in the last 700 years, tomorrow's saints will be just another 2. Half of the pope saints were declared through acclamation (no formal process)as they were mostly martyrs during the first three centuries of Christianity. There really is no "rush" as these 2 popes have shown great examples of holiness and are iconic fathers of the Vatican2 church. It may just be a golden age in the papacy yet.

Sat, April 26, 2014 @ 8:19 PM

Add a New Comment

Enter the code you see below:
code
 

Comment Guidelines: No HTML is allowed. Off-topic or inappropriate comments will be edited or deleted. Thanks.