Benedict XVI: 'It Was Clear John Paul II Was a Saint'

The News From Poland ^ | 3/7/14

[marshmallow]

In his first interview since his abdication, Pope Emeritus Benedict has revealed how he became convinced that his Polish predecessor John Paul II was a saint.

The former pope's reflections come less than two months before the canonisation of the late Polish pontiff, marking the final stage in his path to sainthood.

“The reality that John Paul II was a saint became increasingly clear to me in the years that I worked with him,” the retired pontiff stated in a written interview published in Italian paper Corriere della Sella.

“John Paul II did not ask for applause, and he never looked troubled when he was taking decisions.

“He acted in accordance with his faith and his beliefs, and he was also willing to endure blows against him,” he added.

“I could not and should not have imitated him, but I did try and continue his legacy and endeavours as best as I could.”

Pope John Paul II will be canonised in the Vatican on 27 April.

[Biggirl]

You have been put on mental ignore. Done.

[ebb tide]

Never said the NY Times. Why did you imply I did?

[piusv]

Have you done the same with me (mental ignore)? Because I posted Church teaching that does not say unbaptized children WILL go to Heaven and you’re posting as if you haven’t read it.

[ebb tide]

Wanna bet?

[ebb tide]

Some people retreat to the “ignore” mode when they’re backed into a corner.

[piusv]

I think she has more on mental ignore than not. I just saw her tell someone else she was putting them on mental ignore.

If you have to ignore that many people, maybe internet forums just isn’t the place for you.

[ebb tide]

I’m trying to get your lexicon down.

So far, I have:

“case closed”
“buried”
“done”

[ebb tide]

I had a young daughter who used to try that. She’s since matured and grew out of it by the time she was twelve.

[ebb tide]

We are dealing with the mercy of God and will not prevent the children to come to Him.

Right!

[Mrs. Don-o]

What a beautiful picture!

It sounds trite, redundant, childish even, but I love love.

[Mrs. Don-o]

This opinion of yours, I think, lacks factual foundation. I don't have the space to link to the information (it's my bedtime), but --- just for instance --- Pope Benedict worked every effectively against abuser-priests during his last years at the CDF, as soon as he got into a position of authority to deal personally with the caseload. As Pope, Benedict continued along these lines from the beginning of his pontificate to the end. One of the very first things he did is go after that criminal-sociopath Fr. Marcial Maciel, and forced the reform of his religious founations, the Legion of Christ and the Regnum Christi.

In his last 2 years alone, Benedict laicized 400 priests who had credible allegations against them.

As for Pope John Paul, he was lied to very effectively by devils like Maciel: but heing deceived is not the same as being an enabler. Abusers are often very, very clever at living a double life, appearing decent, personable , even charming as well as devout: it's part of their twisted psychological make-up.

In any case, Pope Benedict's zealous rooting-out of the guilty parties was well covered by veteran Vatican reporter, the hugely knowledgeable John L. Allen: google any of his articles and you'll see what I mean.

[onyx]

Nah, not childish at all!
I have a framed one of that one, too.
I also love, love, love too.
:)

[Mrs. Don-o]

Hello ther, biggirl! The abortion has been going down steadily over the last decade or more. The number aborted annually is now at the lowest rate since 1974. I don’t understand anyone talking about more people (let alone “more Catholics”) aborting babies. That lacks factual foundation.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I always enjoy your comments, and I don’t think you owe a reply to anybody who is personally insulting. When that happens, just say a prayer in good will, and move on -— I believe that is most pleasing to the Holy Spirit, who gives us the power to love our enemies.

[piusv]

I’ve asked her if she saw my post about the Catholic teaching on unbaptized babies. She has decided to ignore it. It is not a given that unbaptized children go to Heaven. She should stop saying they do.

[Biggirl]

You gave me a good idea. Thank-you and God Bless. :)

[Biggirl]

Hi Mrs. Don-o!

Today posting after a very busy weekend which just has past. Went to the cathedral for the very first time with a canidate, a baptised Catholic whom I am sponsoring and two other baptised Catholics who will be receving first holy communion and later in the Easter season by coming back to the same cathedral to be confirmed.

It was there I had witnessed for the first time, people who will be baptised this Easter eve coming up, signed their names, thus becoming the elect with their sponsors.

RCIA, I have learned over the months I have been on the parish team, is a reminder to those of us who are “cradle Catholics” to not take our faith as Catholics for granted. Lent is a very important reminder of that. When one thinks of it, it is begining anew for all in the Church this Lent.

Plus for the new Archbishop, it is his first presiding over this special ceremony. Up to 260 people will be coming into the Church this Easter.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Excellent! We’ve got 18 in our parish (2 groups, Spanish and English), 10x that many in the Diocese, and it’s one of the smallest dioceses in the country — East TN is only about 2% Catholic)

[Biggirl]

Amazing!

Having 260 coming into the Church, via baptism, being received, or making first holy communion, in the Hartford, CT, Archdiocese is also wonderful. Even if it was just one person being baptised, being received, or making first holy communion is would be wonderful indeed.

[FourtySeven]

It’s not a given that unbaptized babies go to Heaven but it’s also not a given they are in Limbo either. I do not believe either is a matter of dogma (is the doctrine of Limbo dogmatic?) so one is free to believe as one chooses in that regard as long as one doesn’t condemn the other for disagreeing. As far as I understand, that is what the passage from the Catechism states upthread.

Myself, I agree with Biggirl’s take on the issue: It doesn’t seem reasonable to me for a God who is not only all merciful, but “wills that all come to salvation” would allow babies (especially unborn ones) that are not baptized to languish in some Limbo. Limbo to me seems to be a construct of theologians who were not aware of or couldn’t imagine the horrors of abortion we face today, much less medical knowledge of miscarriages and the like.

Remember God is not limited to the Sacraments he instituted. He can save, and even bring to Heaven anyone he wants. Of course he can’t violate his own infinitely holy and just nature but just because we can’t imagine how an unbaptized person may enter heaven doesn’t mean it can’t be done. Who knows what happens at the moment of death for these babies, maybe in some mysterious way they are given the grace to choose God and are thus baptized by desire (as St. Dismas must have been). Or maybe they aren’t “baptized” at all (at least not as we understand baptism) because again, God is not limited to the Sacraments. (That idea, that God isn’t limited to the Sacraments, IS dogmatic by the way)

So again, we have a choice. I chose to believe God holds the sentiment, “suffer not the little children that they come to me” very seriously. Much more seriously than our limited idea of how an unbaptized baby fits (or doesn’t fit) into some Sacramental peg hole.