1. Religion & Spirituality
Send to a Friend via Email
Scott P. Richert

The Coming Canonization of Pope John Paul II

By July 9, 2013

Follow me on:

On Friday, July 5, 2013, Pope Francis authorized the promulgation of a decree from the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, declaring a second miracle attributable to the intercession of Blessed Pope John Paul II.A portrait of the Polish Pope John Paul II (1920-2005), born Karol Wojtyla, Boston, Massachussetts, 1979. (Photo by Bachrach/Getty Images) While speculation regarding the second miracle abounds, all that we know for certain at this point is that it occurred either on or shortly after May 1, 2011—the day of the beatification of Pope John Paul II.

While most media reports assumed that the approval of the second miracle amounted to approval of canonization of the late Polish pope, there is still at least one more step in the process: a consistory of cardinals, which will consider the cause of canonization. It is possible, though not likely, that the consistory will decline to recommend canonization. Even if that were to happen, Pope Francis could (and likely would) authorize canonization anyway.

The beatification of Pope John Paul II caused consternation among two radically different groups of Catholics: certain traditionalists, who were upset by certain action of the pope during his reign; and dissenters on the left, who found John Paul's firm orthodoxy on moral issues unacceptable in their "enlightened" vision of a church that conforms to the dissolute morality of the modern age. Lost in both cases was the sense of joy that we all should have when the Church tells us that a man is assuredly in Heaven. Whatever any of us may thought about Pope John Paul II, desiring him to be somewhere other than Heaven is a sin against charity (to put it mildly).

"Beatification," Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., writes in his Modern Catholic Dictionary, "allows veneration of the blessed, canonization requires it." Should Blessed John Paul II be raised to the full honors of the altars, every Catholic, including those who disliked the late pope for whatever reason, must accord him the honor that belongs to all of those who, having run the course of their earthly lives in fidelity to Christ, now enjoy the beatific vision. To refuse to do so says nothing about any failings of the late pope, and everything about our own failings to trust the judgment of the Church.

More on Pope John Paul II:

(A portrait of the Polish Pope John Paul II (1920-2005), born Karol Wojtyla, Boston, Massachussetts, 1979. Photo by Bachrach/Getty Images)

Connect With Scott:
Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Newsletters
Comments
July 9, 2013 at 6:50 pm
(1) Lionel (Paris) says:

Canonization of John Paul II and of John XXIII this year:
my concern has nothing to do with a lack of Charity.
I do not deny that John Paul II and John XXIII may be Holy – only God knows – and I sincerely hope that they are; however, I think that it is a useless, controversial, absurd and damaging project, the introduction in the Church of an additional cause of division…
Ultimately, it is the reform of Vatican II which is celebrated throughout this festival of precipitate beatifications and canonizations…
They canonize their fatal reform. It is a way to lock it so that no one can question anymore.
If their intentions were really good and without mental reservations, they would have beatified in priority characters such as the deserving and distinguished Cardinals Mindszenty and Slipyj; yet it did not happen…
Please, let me know what are the good fruits of Vatican II and of the Popes who were pushing for this devastating Council and promulgated its decrees, while sanctioning the faithful Catholics?
Certainly, no one knows who is holy or is not.

July 9, 2013 at 9:52 pm
(2) Grey Bear says:

Monsignor Luigi Villa would beg to differ. Roncalli & Montini, the perpetrators of Vatican II were not fit for beatification according to the life long investigation Fr. Villa conducted. Both were traced to ‘Freemasonry’, Montini even had masonic symbols affixed to his Mothers headstone. If one believes that Vatican II caused the horrific problems inside the Church, corrupted the Mass, took the reverence away from the Eucharist, devastated vocations, then to praise either man is wrong. There was an earlier John XXIII who was thoroughly corrupt, why take the name of a tyrant ? John Paul II was indeed a holy man but what is the hurry ?

July 10, 2013 at 12:16 am
(3) josie dream says:

I dream of PJPII last December 2012, i saw him at the lobby at his office very lonely and sad he is looking at the ground floor he didnt noticed that i was at his back , we are only 2 on that floor then he went away when i step on where he stood up i saw his cross fall down the floor and i got it and kiss im thinking if i were going to keep it in my bag, but im afraid if it will lost, but i prefer to give that to the lady guard coz its so precious stones.i saw also plenty rosaries on that floor but i didnt pick it up coz i need a sack where i can put it all. i instructed the lady guard to keep it in his locker room and make it really safe that no one can take it and i also make that the door in his office is really closed and safe before i go. then i step one floor i saw a building where many people talking at the top of that building i was there. then i go down go to the next building where their are so many police inside that vatican the police is waiting for me holding a paper for my resignation they said i know you have no sin or ur not guilty about this accusation againts you but to make it stop just sign it so that we can have peace. and i know also that i dont have guilt inside of my heart. they can read my mind. when i signed the paper i saw 5 man inside the police station big flat face looking at me and smiling, happy but they are afraid coz they are the one who did that accusation againts me the hieght of that 5 man is only up to the knee of the 3 policeman who are wearing a gray color uniform inside the cubicle. then i went out i step 3 steps up in a land walking the road with a tree then i arrive at the farm land and raise up my hand saying LORD i surrender your church, your kingdom i will leave it to you.,,,thats all my dream. During the election of pope last february i saw that building where i was on the top its a conclave building where pope is being elected and i received an email dated february 23, 2013 about resignation of Pope Benedict…

July 10, 2013 at 12:40 am
(4) Gregory says:

To suggest that Bl. John XXIII specifically named himself after the antipope John XXIII is simply to not understand that the number after the name has nothing to do with the name, other than to say that he was the 23rd pope with that name. Since the first John XXIII was deemed not a valid pope, the XXIII naturally fell to the next pope to take the name.

Since there were 22 other pope Johns, not all of whom were rascals, as well as Sts. John the Baptist and the Apostle, and myriad other Sts. John throughout the history of the Church, it is simply ridiculous to assert that Bl. Pope John XXIII chose to name himself after an antipope!

As far as canonising Bl. Popes John XXIII and John Paul II somehow “canonising” Vatican II, let’s keep in mind a few things:

1) Like it or not, Vatican II was an authoritative Ecumenical Council of the Church, and doesn’t need further affirmation.

2) The fruits of the Council have not fully ripened. We have yet to finish enduring the post-conciliar “silly season”. Such seasons have followed every Council of the Church, as clergy and laity alike have wrestled with how to implement the various teachings of the Council. Keep in mind that Arianism was at its strongest ebb after it was condemned at the Council of Nicea!

3) The Church has canonised saints who in their lifetime, supported various antipopes’ claims to the Chair of Peter (though out of genuine mistake and confusion). Their subsequent canonisations were a testament to the holiness of their lives, not an endorsement of their wrong view of who was Pope when. I trust that, without debating the merits and demerits of Vatican II, we can see the analogy in the present case.

July 10, 2013 at 4:00 am
(5) Lionel (Paris) says:

Gregory,
OK! you have good arguments…
Regards LD

July 10, 2013 at 4:05 am
(6) Lionel (Paris) says:

Gegory,
OK! you have good arguments…
Regards LD

July 10, 2013 at 11:21 am
(7) MJK says:

The apparent “fast-tracking” of this process gives me pause. What’s the rush!

My concern as little to do with me missing the mark on being charitable. It goes straight to a concern with the misplaced worship of persona.

It seems the pathological desire for immediacy has come to infect certain elements with this institution and its culture. It would be wonderful if the Church was truly counter-revolutionary to present mores — purposefully deliberate and a bulwark to the impetuous tendency to break with tradition and rush things…When something is rushed through an established process then I become concerned for the many unintended consequences that come about in the end…

July 10, 2013 at 11:25 am
(8) MJK says:

In the end, what’s the rush…

July 10, 2013 at 11:38 am
(9) Scott P. Richert says:

Michael, the only “rush” was Benedict XVI’s suspension of the waiting period before the process could begin. Everything else has simply followed the process.

It seems odd to me that most of those who are objecting to the “rush” here (and please note that I’m not saying that this applies to you) are great admirers of Benedict, yet they absolve him of any part in the “rush.” I myself am a great admirer, as you know, of Benedict, and I prefer instead to assume that he knew what he was doing in suspending the waiting period. He, after all, knew John Paul II as well as anyone ever did, and certainly had a sense of whether his dear friend was indeed in Heaven.

July 10, 2013 at 11:54 am
(10) Jameson says:

Ecclesiastes 9:5

5 For the living know that they die, and the dead know not anything, and there is no more to them a reward, for their remembrance hath been forgotten.

Can you think without a brain? Did Jesus rise from the dead before his resurrection? The dead are dead until the resurrection. To claim that JPII is in heaven and is doing miracles here on earth is unbiblical.

JPII also believed in the visions of Mary, this is Satan appearing as an angel of light that will deceive the whole world into receiving the mark of the beast. Mary is in the grave waiting for her son to resurrect her.

What reason would there be for a resurrection if we go directly to heaven or hell?

It is such a shame that so many people are being led by Satan to believe the first lie, “You shall not surely die”. This is the foundation of all false religion.

July 10, 2013 at 2:28 pm
(11) celine says:

When is the possible date for John Paul ll canonozation of sainthood as my family would love to go. thank you.

July 11, 2013 at 5:00 pm
(12) MJK says:

Thanks, Scott. To be honest, I wasn’t aware that it was Benedict specifically who suspended the waiting period…was under the impression it was bureaucratic Vatican move…

I’m still perplexed as to the rationale for suspending the waiting period because as you note [Benedict] after all, knew John Paul II as well as anyone ever did, and certainly had a sense of whether his dear friend was indeed in Heaven. If he knew he was in Heaven, then why suspend the established waiting period. Is there a rationale for suspending the waiting process?

As an aside, it is my understanding that being sainted requires more than simply the belief that one is in Heaven…established miracles etc.

As you know, I always enjoy your insights and very well-reasoned perspective.

On a separate note, I must say I’m struggling making sense with many of the current pope’s declarations/comments/sermons — most recently taking umbrage with his latest tweet on immigration, which basically encourages people to break the rule of law and making those who object to such behavior seem uncharitable…not the nuance message one should expect from a true pastoral leader…apologies for my digression.

July 11, 2013 at 6:44 pm
(13) Kirt Higdon says:

I don’t see why there should be a waiting period at all for openning a case for canonization, although it might be a good idea to have a waiting period for the canonization itself. In the case of an elderly person who has died, even a five year waiting period for openning a case may involve the death of people who knew him well and whose testimony would then not be available due to the waiting period.

July 12, 2013 at 1:56 am
(14) Flora A. De La Pena says:

I would like to share a “miracle” to help hasten the canonization of Pope John Paul II. I am a 65 years old medical doctor and a practicing pathologist here in the Philippines. I was diagnosed with cancer of the thyroid gland but fearful at first to submit to an operation. But the solitary nodule on my right thyroid grew in size and number and later involved the left side. I was finally convinced by my youngest daughter to submit to a total thyroidectomy. About this time, I was told by a relative that the relics of Blessed John Paul II arrived for veneration at the Holy Family Church in Eastwood, Quezon City here in the Philippines. With my family, I went there, prayed and asked for healing through his intercession. And the day before my surgery last December 7, 2012, we went back to that church after I saw a small photo of JPII I kept inside my bag suddenly surfaced.Our prayers were answered because the histopathological report of my thyroid turned negative for cancer!

July 12, 2013 at 10:44 am
(15) Scott P. Richert says:

Michael, the rationale for suspending the waiting process would be that Benedict was convinced of John Paul’s sanctity. Believing that, why wait? The rest of the process, as I noted, has proceeded normally.

The purpose of establishing miracles attributed to the person is precisely to show that he is indeed in Heaven. Were he in Hell, he could not intercede for anyone here on earth; were he in Purgatory, his efforts would be focused on purification from the temporal effects of his sins. Miracles attributed to the intercession of a person who has died are a sign of his presence before the throne of God.

The five-year waiting period was established out of an abundance of caution. But the Church, of course, acknowledges the validity (at least historically) of canonization by acclamation. The suspension of the waiting period can be seen as a partial return to that older form of canonization, though the fact that the rest of the requirements remain in place, including the certification of two miracles, means that the process regarding John Paul II is still essentially the same as the current process for anyone else.

July 13, 2013 at 7:51 am
(16) John Stefanyszyn says:

One of the well known reputations of John Paul II was that he was recognized as a “champion for religious freedom”.
…but “freedom of religion” dictates that it is RIGHT (a right) to worship any ‘god’.
It is a blatant hypocrasy for one who speaks of Christ to say in the same breath that it is right to be free to worship any god…for Christ is the Son of the One and Only Creator God.
On the other hand, perhaps John Paul II was not a hypocrite since in reality he was confessing the one who believes in being free to live one’s own will, to establish one’s own “rights”….satan.

July 13, 2013 at 5:46 pm
(17) maria says:

Then Jameson, how will you explain that jesus said to the good thief,’today you shall be with me in paradise’ the truth is heaven was closed to man after original sin and it opened up the day jesus died. All the prophets and holy people including st. joseph who died before jesus and had been waiting in limbo went to heaven the day jesus died. Mary, the mother of Jesus was created by God without any original sin because she would be the vessel that would carry salvation, carry God and she must be sinless. She did not commit any sin as well during her lifetime and so she did not have the punishment of death that goes with the original sin. She did not die but fell asleep and went body and soul to heaven. When a person die. there is what we call, ‘immediate judgement’ where you will find yourself in front of God and you will be judge because HE already knows based on your life your judgement. But there is second coming and that is when all the dead will come back to life. The aposles of Jesus rising first. and then all the creatures of God from the begionning of time. At that point you will come back to life to be judge again in front of the whole world and you will receive the same judgement but this time everything will be shown to the world. and this time you will see the son of man coming down form the clouds and then all last GOD the father. where even the angels will tremble.

July 13, 2013 at 5:46 pm
(18) mary says:

Jameson, Mary is no ordinary woman and she does not perform miracles nor the saints. YOuve got that wrong. GOD does the miracle but through their intercession because now they are so close to GOD. Did not Jesus perform his first miracle because mary asked him even if he wasnt suppose to yet. well that is the power of mary in the heart of her son. and saints which mean technically ‘in heaven with God’ has the same if not as powerful hold in Gods heart because when they were alive they gave their will to GOD and so now cannot say no to them when you asked them to interceed for you. The bible.. well it has been studied and meditated upon by many holy fathers of the catholic church since the time of saint peter. generations after generations.. that is why they made the cathecism so it can be followed well. it is dangerous to read it and interpret it on your own jameson. because people can have variety of understanding. But all the teachings in the catholic church has been studied through century. it is funny how people outside of the church who dont understand any of the teachings are so fast to say that the teachings are wrong when in reality st. peter was the first pope when jesus established this church and then most of the other christian religion just started from someone (either a priest or a man from the catholic church) who wanted to break from the catholic church and form their oown christian religion when they have not been given authority by Jesus.

July 13, 2013 at 5:50 pm
(19) maria says:

Mary is no ordinary woman and she does not perform miracles nor the saints. YOuve got that wrong. GOD does the miracle but through their intercession because now they are so close to GOD. Did not Jesus perform his first miracle because mary asked him even if he wasnt suppose to yet. well that is the power of mary in the heart of her son. and saints which mean technically ‘in heaven with God’ has the same if not as powerful hold in Gods heart because when they were alive they gave their will to GOD and so now cannot say no to them when you asked them to interceed for you. The bible.. well it has been studied and meditated upon by many holy fathers of the catholic church since the time of saint peter. generations after generations.. that is why they made the cathecism so it can be followed well. it is dangerous to read it and interpret it on your own jameson. because people can have variety of understanding. But all the teachings in the catholic church has been studied through century. it is funny how people outside of the church who dont understand any of the teachings are so fast to say that the teachings are wrong when in reality st. peter was the first pope when jesus established this church and then most of the other christian religion just started from someone (either a priest or a man from the catholic church) who wanted to break from the catholic church and form their oown christian religion when they have not been given authority by Jesus.

July 13, 2013 at 6:06 pm
(20) maria says:

Pope John Paul II lost his mother when he was only 9 and his brother only a few years after that. His father was the only one whom he had and he was a religious man whom karol (pjp christian name) would find when waking in the middle of the night on his knees deep in prayer. His father died when he was a young adult and he found himself alone and then one day was srtuck by a vehicle at a secluded road and left to die there. it was only a good samaritan who rescued him. Many of his friends and professors where killed during the nazis occupation of poland. He had seen and experienced many things in his lifetime. He was a good man with a brilliant mind and great sense of humor. But most important, he loved God. He loved the mother of God, Mary as well because the best way to the son is through the mother. She had inteceeded for so many souls from the moment she ask jesus to make more wine to the present time. Mary is the new eve. when eve disobeyed and ate that fruit mary obeyed and said yes to God. when adam was tempted and succumb to temptation, the new adam jesus accepted with obedience the punishment due to man. THERE IS A WHOLE TEACHING ABOUT MARY and all the individual saints. and many little things in the catholic church.

July 15, 2013 at 11:20 pm
(21) Ernest says:

Will Pope John Paul II will become the saint to whom pedophiles should pray to receive Divne protection?

July 16, 2013 at 12:54 pm
(22) monica says:

YS he must be holy cse he did what god willed him to …even at that age and with that health he continued his responsibalities ..and did not back out or ask for retirement …he did work for woman and many nations …how many sacrificse he must have given which the world dosent knwo about ….god will reward and he has ..he can inticeed for us …

July 18, 2013 at 4:55 pm
(23) Richard L. Newell says:

If these false pastors cared about souls, they would never touch the scandal inherent in canonizing a negiligent megolomaniac like Wojtyla. He burns in Hell, and any who offer him up for the veneration of Catholics will do likewise, leading souls astray as they did at Vatican II. A Hitler Youth and a collaborationist with the Argentine military junta are going to canonize this panderer of ten thousand child rapists? Satan is completely in charge! Turn to Mary.

July 23, 2013 at 3:50 pm
(24) phbond says:

Scott – I think there is another point you have missed when you suggest that people against the canonization of JP II don’t want him to be in Heaven. There may be people of this ilk, but they belong to those with whom a conversation cannot be had. I do not think it is fair to suggest this of many who feel this is a serious and grave error. Let us remember that not all in heaven are canonized. Obviously, there are many in Heaven about which we (the public at-large) know nothing; isn’t it safe to think that most saints are anonymous to the world, because they lived out their lives in relative obscurity, and died in a state of grace? We may never hear their names – and never be told we can ask for their intercession. And that is just fine, thank you very much; there are many saints upon whom we can already call. So, my argument against JP II’s canonization is not, not, not a statement about his soul – which I have no right to make – but rather a argument of prudence. There are too many controversies linked to him directly or indirectly: the priest-sex scandal not dealt with; the tendency of the hierarchy to look the other way at ‘liberal abuses’ of Church rites and authority while time and again silencing and sanctioning ‘conservative abuses”; etc., etc. Thus, to canonize him is to insight – or at the least open the door to – grave scandal regarding what this seems to endorse. I understand that canonization does not, automatically endorse anything but that he lived a life of heroic virtue, but the Church ought to know that what IS and what SEEMS can both be equally powerful forces. And, the Church should be harnessing causes which will guide, not distract. I simply fail to see how JP II’s canonization can do anything but distract.

July 23, 2013 at 4:01 pm
(25) Felix says:

What strikes me as odd is the concept of God upon which the whole canonisation system rests. We all understand that it’s God, and not the candidate for sanctity, who performs the miracle. But this makes God appear to behave like a medieval or Renaissance monarch, who grants benefits most effectively when asked to do so by a court favourite. I wonder if this is an image with which we ought to be satisfied?

August 7, 2013 at 5:13 pm
(26) Richard L. Newell says:

I just wanted to amend my previous comment, # 23. It’s true noone has any way of knowing that John Paul or anyone else is in Hell, and I sure hope he isn’t there, and noone else is going there. That said, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist or theologian to notice that just because no human knows where he is, that he can be a saint. I’m thinking mostly of the scandal. If John Paul did repent of his sins and negligence, indifference and nascent heresies (God willing), he did it without the world knowing about it. The possibility doesn’t make him a saint. The same could be said for Judas or Martin Luther. All things equal, they are probably in Hell, too. Pope Francis doesn’t ‘have to’ canonize him, so why do it? It’s a very clumsy, transparent, and ultimately really damaging ‘face-saving’ PR stunt.

September 1, 2013 at 12:28 pm
(27) Carl Grillo says:

Everyone seems to be missing the salient and problematic features of this double “canonization.” Firstly, canonization is held by all theologians to be an infallible decree of the Roman Pontiff. Secondly, the public history of these two Popes has many elements that do not cohere with heroic virtue; such as the abysmal failure of John Paul II to discipline or depose Bishops guilty of doctrinal, liturgical, and moral aberrations…the famous Assisi meeting, which creates the unfortunate impression that Our Lord Jesus Christ is not necessary for “world peace.” or salvation… the Apology for the Sins of the Church (2000)…uh..that is “churchmen;” which despite all the theological precisions, still gives the impression that the Holy Church is not Holy…As to John XXIII, Cardinal Lercaro called his prudential decision to convoke the Council – independent of the results which are there for all to see – “rash and impulsive,” and lacking in insight of future developments that could have easily been foreseen…None of this is compatible with true sanctity or being a Pope – Confessor of the Catholic faith – Saint. Period.

September 26, 2013 at 11:06 am
(28) Richard L. Newell says:

I would like to rescind my earlier negative comments. I repent of having judged the recent Popes, which is not my right. The upcoming canonization was a scandal or obstacle to me, but my priest says that this may not be an infallible decree, or at least I am not required to believe that John Paul (or John) is a saint to receive the sacraments. The most important thing is for each to try to follow the faith as best he can, and leave judgement to God.

October 3, 2013 at 10:44 pm
(29) CalMark says:

John Paul II was at the very least culpably ignorant of, at worst complicit with (probably more the former) child abusers and their enablers. His reputation is for treating the victims with cold disinterest — hardly charitable.

He did not excommunicate a single high-profile Social Justice Catholic, lay or clergy. He held a news conference with Saddam Hussein’s mouthpiece, jointly condemning “war,” a thinly veiled condemnation of the United States.

JP II also subjugated The Church of Martyrs (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) to pull-out-all-the-stops ecumenism with the Patriarchate of Moscow, a co-conspirator with the Communist Kremlin (unto this day) for persecution of Catholicism.

As for John XXIII, I am ambivalent.

We should pray to the Holy Spirit that this should not come to pass. If it does, remember that canonization a human process, its only infallible component the acknowledgment that someone is in Heaven. In short, Canonization is a kind of Catholic “Hall of Fame,” and every Hall of Fame contains people who shouldn’t be there.

November 1, 2013 at 12:06 pm
(30) lg says:

Dear Scott,
Can you explain to me how a pope who kissed the Q’aran can be canonized as a saint?

March 12, 2014 at 12:59 pm
(31) Mary says:

Pope John Paul, II, rejected God’s peace plan revealed at Fatima and promulgated his own earthly, political, Masonic ecumenical peace plan. Vatican II Popes have all rejected Fatima in favor of worldly power and recognition. Now, yet another Vatican II Pope wants to canonize that worldly peace plan. Fatima was declared true by the Church, to promote its opposite is sin.

March 12, 2014 at 1:08 pm
(32) Alex Roman says:

Dear CalMark,

I am a Ukrainian Greek-Catholic whose great-uncle was the underground locum tenens of that Church under soviet communism.

Pope John Paul II NEVER subjugated the Church of Martyrs under anyone – he was wildly popular among the faithful of the UGCC and when our Church came out of the Catacombs, our priests began by singing “Ad Multos Annos” to Pope John Paul II before Russian Orthodox prelates. As for ecumenism, the UGCC also engages in such with the Russian Orthodox Church.

Ukrainian Catholics will rejoice together on the day this pope is proclaimed a Saint – together with our dearly beloved Pope John XXIII.

Alex

March 12, 2014 at 1:10 pm
(33) Alex Roman says:

Mary,

Pope John Paul II was a Marian pope who prayed the Rosary incessantly. He venerated Our Lady of Fatima, and also many other sacred Images and Icons of our Lady, very highly.

As for the proponents of Fatima, there are various interpretations of the message of Fatima out there.

The only ones I’m interested in are those that support and defend the Holy Catholic Church and her unbroken succession of Popes down from St Peter.

Alex

March 18, 2014 at 3:49 pm
(34) LeonG says:

Thankfully, we do not need to pray to saints for salvation – JPII is definitely off my agenda.

March 22, 2014 at 9:02 am
(35) Ian Barker says:

I’m currently fighting my 4th bout of cancer. The treatment is very aggressive, I’m becoming very weak and fatigued and the outlook is not all that good. I speak to my parents every week on the phone however there is an issue which is starting to cause upset between my mum and I. My mum is from a catholic background and is quite religeous. I on the other hand, am not religeous at all. Over a period of time, my mum has become quite obsessed with the idea of this dead pope guy. Each time we speak she insists that he is up and about, wandering around my life, looking over me and the only reason I should get better is if this guy sanctions it – and then tells me that I should pray to him constantly as he has been cannonised – whatever that means.
As said, I’m not into all this stuff and for 12 years now I have put my faith in medical science and the good doctors who practice it. They have after all got me this far. This may not sit well with the religeous scribes amongst us but to me, when your dead your dead. Unless I’m mistaken, this chap died in 2005. You can’t just come back to life some 8-9 years later and start procuring miracles – it is both physically and scientifically impossible. Yet every time we speak, my mum starts banging on about the dead pope. Truth is, this obsession is starting to give me the willeys and although I try to explain that none of it interests me in the slightest, it starting to cause cracks in our relationship which in my current state of health, is the last thing I want or need. I’ve asked if she would keep her views to herself and explained that it’s not really my thing but I fear she’s having none of it. I’ve come on to this forum to learn, and to get the views of other perhaps other like minded people. For the religeous amongst you, what is it about this story that drives people to such insistence?

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.