I'm curious as to what others think about it. Although I was (am) a huge admirer and in a more-than-formal sense a follower of the late Pope, and think "Pope Saint John Paul II the Great" is a justifiable title, I'm still a little bothered by the speed of these proceedings. For that matter I was a little bothered by the general speeding-up of the canonization process which he instituted. I guess I was always slightly uneasy about the rock-star adulation he received, and this seems partially a continuation of that. Though if it tempted him to pride in the earlier days of his pontificate, his last years of very public weakness and decline surely would have corrected that.
The Beatification of John Paul II
34 responses to “The Beatification of John Paul II”
-
I don’t have any problem with it.
-
I don’t either.
AMDG -
While I was perhaps his biggest fan, in light of what has been revealed since his death- Fr Maciel’s monstrous hypocrisy, the depth of clerical abuse, not to mention the distortion of Catholic social teaching that occurred under his watch- I understand those who object. But he is being beatified not for his strengths as an administrator, or even judge of character (Mother Teresa’s confessor proved to be an abuser!), but simply for his holiness, which was obvious. So I am fine with it.
-
I’ve never liked the terminology “I’m uncomfortable with…” because it’s often a euphemism for “I don’t like…” or “It’s wrong…” But in this case, on this topic, it’s accurate: I’m uncomfortable with it. The word “unseemly” comes to mind as well. As with someone dating or remarrying too soon after the death of a spouse–not morally wrong, but…a little unseemly.
-
The Catholic church isn’t seemly. That’s Anglicans
pax -
Heh. Can’t argue with that.
-
About this being a continuation of the rock star adulation–Benedict XVI initiated the process and I can’t imagine his being influenced by RSA. 🙂
And he would have been in a pretty good position to observe the holiness of John Paul’s life. I can’t even dredge up a scintilla of concern here.
AMDG -
I’m much more concerned about the frock and the hat that I’m going to wear to the beatification.
AMDG -
I agree that the fact that Benedict, a close observer of JPII, and one who did feel the urgency of the sex abuse crisis, wants to go ahead with this seals the deal.
I wouldn’t get too excited about the hat, Janet. I was at the beatifiction of JH Newman, remember, and was only too glad to have a solid Tiley hat to make up for the umbrella from which I came separated. Solid and rainproof it is; aesthetic it is not. -
A couple of people, when I was criticizing Fr Corapi for his celebrity cult, mentioned that John Paul had a sort of rock star status, so what is the big deal? Well, for one thing I saw him three times and never had to pay for a ticket (Fr C’s begin at $35 on Ticketmaster and are scalped for $100+)…
Anyway, here is my take on the beatification: http://caelumetterra.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/blessed-john-paul-ii-3/ -
“frock”? Sounds Anglican to me.
-
I was making fun of the wedding babble. Since I don’t have a TV and or a transporter, I will just try and dream about the beatification and I never wear a hat to bed–well, maybe if it’s freezing.
AMDG -
I think I agree completely with Daniel’s remarks.
The Catholic church isn’t seemly. That’s Anglicans
Heh!
I think it was Oscar Wilde who said that the Cahtolic Church is for sinners and saints, for the perfectly respectable, the Anglican Church will do.
I don’t know that it was very seemly for the minister officiating at the Royal Wedding to say that testing the milk before buying the cow was a good idea! (Don’t know what his actual words were), Particularly when the testing had been going on for 8 years. 🙂
“Frock” is a most excellent word, I congratulate you Janet. -
Mother Teresa’s confessor proved to be an abuser!
Really? Just goes to show how little we can sometimes know people. -
In my mind, the new sexual order became the official and conventional norm in 1980-something when Madonna and Sean Penn got married and a news story about it said, “The bride, whose nude photos appeared in Playboy [and Penthouse?] last month, wore….”
-
“The bride, whose nude photos appeared in Playboy [and Penthouse?] last month, wore….”
yeah…
-
I didn’t pay much attention to the wedding. I saw there were a lot of news stories and blog posts about it, but I mostly didn’t read them, which I guess is why “frock” didn’t register on me as referring to it. Nothing against the monarchy, of which I approve in principle, or the couple–more like the same impulse that makes me ignore the Oscars, the Grammies, etc., and in late years the Olympics, which I once enjoyed. Some sort of reaction to hype.
-
I realised even as I posted that it was highly unlikely that Janet would be in Rome for the beatification, but I couldn’t see what other meaning the hat & frock comments had. I didn’t make any connection with the wedding. I do not know how to make my TV work, but I watched the highlights on the Telegraph video, and looked at all their pictures.
-
“I do not know how to make my TV work…”
I guess that means you have some kind of fairly elaborate cable setup? I suspect that skillful navigation of those indicates far too much time spent watching tv, so maybe it good that you don’t know how. -
Really, the only notice I took of the wedding was to find out, via a formula I learned from Sally, my Royal Wedding Guest Name which is Lady Emma Spooky-Burnham.
AMDG -
Wow, that’s cool. I see you got that from her blog. Alas, “street I grew up on” sort of wrecks it for me: Oldhighwaytwenty doesn’t make it as a surname.
-
I don’t know if there is a cable set up or not. There is a large satellite dish in the yard. When I first arrived, I got a phone with AT&T, and I noticed they also sold cable. So I simply assumed the TV won’t work unless one is paying someone. But maybe I just have to switch ‘on’. I don’t know.
-
Until a couple of years ago you should have been able to get something just by turning it on, because in most areas you could get a few channels via analog broadcast–i.e., the way tv worked in the beginning and for 50+ years thereafter–the signal is in the air and the tv just passively picks it up. Now the broadcasts are digital, and older tvs can’t receive them. So you might indeed have to pay someone.
-
In the last ten years of my TV viewing, about all I watched was classic British TV series, like one of Jane Eyre. Once I got hooked on buying HBO box sets, starting with Six Feet Under, my days as a TV viewer were numbered. It was not simply snobbery. The place where I lived in Old Aberdeen was a ‘heritage area’ so we could not have any kind of dish or aerial. That made the reception terrible and erased most of the fun of my annual two week TV-fest. Wimbledon is no fun if you can’t see the ball for ‘snow’ on the screen.
-
The cynic in me is thinking “well, just wait ten or fifteen years, and you can get a soap-opera-fied version of the scandals and divorce of Prince William and what’s-her-name on dvd (or whatever).” Bad cynic! Bad! Go to your room and don’t come out for a while.
-
Well, now you can get Netflix and watch to your hearts content.
AMDG -
I took I’m much more concerned about the frock and the hat that I’m going to wear to the beatification. to mean “I’m even less concerned than not concerned at all.” Again, the royal wedding simply didn’t register.
The Belgian royal family has had to split up to cover events, the king going to Rome for the beatification while the crown prince was in England for the wedding. -
Oh, and I share Mac’s discomfort. In a mild, “Well, if you’re sure, I suppose you know better than me,” kind of way.
-
The main element of discomfort is the feeling “What’s the rush?” It’s not as though his sanctity, or the evidence of it, is going to vanish if we don’t act quickly.
-
Yeah, but I might vanish any day now.
AMDG -
Louise said, “I don’t know that it was very seemly for the minister officiating at the Royal Wedding to say that testing the milk before buying the cow was a good idea!”
When did he say that, Louise? I though the homily from the wedding (I got the link from Sally.) was quite good.
http://www.officialroyalwedding2011.org/blog/2011/April/29/The-Bishop-of-London-s-Sermon
AMDG -
I haven’t read the homily/sermon, I confess, but I thought he had said that it was okay for a couple to live together before marriage. Hence the milk/cow paraphrase. Maybe it was another Anglican minister and I need to go to confession for slandering the minister in question.
-
It is a little hard to believe that the Archbishop of Canterbury would make such a crude joke in the ceremony itself. Must have been in some other context, at least, if not another person entirely.
-
I was trying, over on Daniel’s blog, to articulate the reasons for my discomfort. “What’s the rush?” is definitely the basic sense of it. Underneath that I think is an uneasiness about the possibility of making a mistake when the whole process is speeded up like this. I don’t have any reservations about JPII, but suppose someone had pushed Fr. Maciel?!? As I said at Daniel’s, though, ultimately we just have to trust the Holy Spirit.
I think also, for me, this is an instance of the convert not being totally acculturated. The formal designations of “saint” and “blessed” just don’t mean that much to me, personally, in themselves, but yet the Church commits her full credibility and authority to them. Makes me nervous.
Light On Dark Water 
Leave a comment