Ecumenism Of Blood: Can A Non-catholic Be Canonized?

[mortify ii]

Peace be with you all,

 

What do you folks feel about the prospect of the Church canonizing a non-Catholic as a Saint? In principle the common teaching nowadays is that it's not absolutely necessary to be Catholic, and conceivably even an atheist can make it to heaven. If all this is true, is it not possible that a non-Catholic be raised to the altar for veneration?

 

There is already one case for a Lutheran pastor by the name of Karl Friedrich Stellbring, who along with several priests was executed by the Nazis for teaching children the catechism and speaking out against the Nazi regime. The cause for the beatification of the priests was forwarded during Pope Benedict's reign, but not for the Lutheran pastor, which caused some rifts in ecumenical dialogue. Lutheran pastor Heinz Russman had this to say:

 

"…the Vatican's decision to beatify the three priests on June 25 -- but not Stellbrink -- is testing that ecumenical spirit, and has some religious leaders worried that the event could drive a wedge between the two communities.

 

"People worry that the priests who are beatified will be seen as higher than Stellbrink, and that the focus will be on the three, not the four,

 

"Many Christians, including me, are disappointed that the current pope seems to be doing little for the ecumenical solidarity of churches, especially regarding Lutherans," 

 

"All four should be beatified," said Russmann

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/20/beatification-of-nazi-mar_n_851249.html

 

 

Meanwhile Pope Francis said the following in his interview with Andrea Tornielli,

 

"I knew a parish priest in Hamburg who was dealing with the beatification cause of a Catholic priest guillotined by the Nazis for teaching children the catechism.  After him, in the list of condemned individuals, was a Lutheran pastor who was killed for the same reason. Their blood was mixed. The parish priest told me he had gone to the bishop and said to him: "I will continue to deal with the cause, but both of their causes, not just the Catholic priest's." This is what ecumenism of blood is. It still exists today; you just need to read the newspapers. Those who kill Christians don't ask for your identity card to see which Church you were baptized in. We need to take these facts into consideration.

 

http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Blog/2796/pope_francis_and_the_ecumenism_of_blood.aspx

 

 

 

 

Giving all that our Holy Father has said, and the upcoming commemoration of the 500th year Lutherans and Catholics split, could it be that as a sign of ecumenism and friendship between denominations, the Bishop of Rome will raise a Lutheran to the alter for veneration?

[Benedictus]

Ecumenism is never advanced by false unity. There is a difference between dialogue, acknowledging shared ground, working towards unity and working to construct a false ecumenism that ignores the challenges, differences and wounds within that dialogue. In no way should any experiment in moving closer together bring confusion to people or water down what is held to be true. This shows a lack of respect and dignity of persons, and is misguided in the long term. If someone agrees with Catholicism then they'd become a Catholic! Having compassion, acknowledging people have worked for good works, or praising those who share our ground on various issues isn't the same thing as saying everything they've done, thought and believe is fine. A saint is someone who has affirmed the fullness of truth according to the Catholic church through their life, beliefs, works, actions and writings. This cannot be done by someone who hasn't been able to achieve this by the very definitions of their beliefs and attitudes within life. Plus who says they'd want us do so? Bit presumptive isn't it?

[Benedictus]

Also, if you think the first part of your post is true, which I don't agree with, then why ask the question? What official documents and examples do you have to support these assertions? Media quotes and out of context excerpts don't cut the mustard. Also being beatified isn't some sort of award or cheap nomination process given to appease other churches or to gain political allies. Maybe this is something else some churches need educating on.

If the Lutherans want to honour Spellbring, and all the rest, then they can do so themselves if it's not prohibited. But I don't think this Lutheran church, or any of the other protestant churches come to that, cares very much about ecumenical relations when they take political and theological stands at odds with the Catholic church. There is always some church or person wanting something, or making noise when it suits them, but they don't offer back the same regard on many other major concerns. The Catholic church is, in many ways, wasting its time in ecumenism with dead denominations. If it takes the role seriously it needs to work with Pentecostal and Evangelical churches. On this front ecumenism needs to get into the 21st century and move away from a limited scope that focuses too heavily on the concerns of European Anglicans and Lutherans, at the cost of where the Christian tide has moved. Those denominations, in many countries, are old horses waiting to die.

Edited April 8, 2014 by Benedictus

[PhuturePriest]

A person once asked a priest if someone like C.S. Lewis could be canonized. He said that, although C.S. Lewis was a good person and a good role model for the faith, a person needs to be Catholic in order to be a canonized Saint.

[Nihil Obstat]

Attempting to canonize a non-Catholic would cause serious scandal among the faithful, as it would amount to an implicit rejection of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.

[Luigi]

First of all, I'm a little surprised that the Lutheran Church would want the Catholic Church to canonize one of its own. I can't recall them ever wanting it done before. And I don't think other religions or denominations have ever expected one of their believers to be canonized by the Catholic Church. So it's a novel concept that's being proposed. 

 

On one hand, it seems out of place to me for the Church to canonize someone who was not Catholic. It would feel like... what? ... the Democrats giving an award to a Republican for acting in a very Democratic way, or vise versa. I'm not sure the recipient would appreciate the gesture. And, as mentioned previously, canonization is much more that an "award." On the other hand, a saint is a model of Christian love, devotion to the Gospel, and heroic virtue. And Stellbrink may have been that.

 

Also, there are certain - how shall we say? - "hurdles" for any candidate for sainthood - proof of heroic virtue, plus two miracles. If I recall correctly, the miracles have to be spaced out over a number of years. The canonization process doesn't happen independently, either; someone - usually the order (or the diocese) of the candidate has to push the process along, doing the necessary research, gathering the necessary testimonies, writing the necessary documents, and so forth. It's a long, slow, and expensive process. Who would be the sponsor for Stellbrink's case? 

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that the Lutheran Church is not monolithic - it has factions, some of which are more liberal and some of which are more conservative, with varying degrees of interest in ecumenism. I don't know all the factions, or to which one Stellbrink belonged, or to which one Pastor Russman belongs. The branch I'm most familiar with doesn't believe in "sharing the altar" with anyone - including other branches of Lutherans - who doesn't belong to their group. I wonder how many Lutherans would feel like the Catholics were co-opting their martyr and trying to dress him up like a Catholic. Pope John Paul II stepped in it rather seriously when he asked Carmelite nuns to establish a monastery at Auschwitz - he thought he was doing a righteous thing, but Jews were so offended that eventually the monastery was relocated. Would Catholics canonizing a Lutheran feel similar to lots of Lutherans? 

 

 

So it seems to me that:

1. The Lutheran Church could establish its own canonization process & standards and begin naming its own saints. Stellbrink sounds like he'd be a good candidate.

2. The Catholic Church could mention Stellbrink in all the official documentation of the lives of the three priests as a non-Catholic who supported, collaborated with, and died with the three Catholic priests. Any academically honest hagiography of the three priests, individually or collectively, would mention Stellbrink as an integral part of their work.

3. The Catholic Church could come up with some other kind of recognition for non-Catholics - The St. Joseph Just Man award, or the Knights of the Good Samaritan (a la Knights of Malta). I mean, universities give honorary degrees to people who never attended their institution, so I guess the Church could do something similar. It's just that we don't have a tradition of doing so. And up until this point, our estranged brethren have never wanted us to do it anyway. 

Edited April 8, 2014 by Luigi

[arfink]

Some in the Catholic social media churn have been doing much to freak out over this stuff. Despite their continual panic, outrage, and fervent desire to find fault with him, I don't think Pope Francis is going to actually canonize a non-Catholic. Might he publicly recognize a non-Catholic for their good works? Absolutely. That I do not doubt, and that should be done.

[AnneLine]

I think that a precedent for how this might be handled already exists.   (Being old and remembering things is helpful, sometimes!)

 

In the early 1960's Pope Paul VI canonized the Catholic Martyrs of a mixed group of Anglican and Catholic Christians who were martyred for their Christian beliefs.  The Catholics were canonized, and the Anglicans were formally mentioned in Paul VI's homily. 

 

The full homily is on the Vatican website (link below).  It is in Latin.

 

For those who want to learn more in English, the only thing I could find quickly is a Wikipedia article about the Uganda Martyrs.  Now I realize that wikipedia isn't a reliable source, but THAT article gives a quote from Pope Paul VI's canonization homily and indicates specifically how it was handled... and they are citing the Vatican website link as THEIR source.  So... in combo, it seems relevant to me.

 

Here's the link to the Wikipedia article:  (retrieved 4/8/2014)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Martyrs

 

Charles Lwanga and Companions

 

Saint Charles (Carl) Lwanga and his companions, the so-called "Martyrs of Uganda", were a group of Christians (both Roman Catholics and Anglicans) who were executed on the orders of Mwanga II, the Kabaka(King) of Buganda, between 1885 and 1887.

 

...

 

Twenty-two of the martyrs were Roman Catholics and were canonized by Pope Paul VI on October 18, 1964. Although the Anglicans were not canonized in the Roman Catholic Church, the Pope did mention them.^[5] Their feast day is June 3. ...

 

The footnote [5] ^^^ reads:

 

From the homily at the canonization of the martyrs of Uganda by Pope Paul VI: "Et mentione digni sunt alii etiam, qui, anglicana instituta religiosa profitentes, pro Christi nomine morte affecti sunt." ("And the others are worthy of mention also, who, professing the Anglican religious customs, were afflicted with death for the name of Christ.")

 

 

And here is a link the full text of Pope Paul VI's homily in Latin (noted on Wikipedia article as their source):  

 

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/homilies/documents/hf_p-vi_hom_19641018_martiri-uganda_lt.html

 

Anyone want to confirm the translation above is accurate?

[mortify ii]

I personally see no reason why the contemporary magisterium could not canonize a non-Catholic especially since it recognizes salvation is more open than once believed.

[Benedictus]

I personally see no reason why the contemporary magisterium could not canonize a non-Catholic especially since it recognizes salvation is more open than once believed.

 

There isn't a difference between the 'contemporary' magisterium on this and before. But there are people with agenda's. Was the penitent thief in Luke's Gospel a Catholic?

[Guest]

Mortify wishes all non catholics would go to hell....It bothers him greatly the thought of someone not catholic going to heaven....Only if we could go back to the good olé days....I love religion....

Edited April 8, 2014 by Guest

[mortify ii]

Mortify wishes all non catholics would go to hell....It bothers him greatly the thought of someone not catholic going to heaven....Only if we could go back to the good olé days....I love religion....

Funny, all this time I thought I believed that God can work outside the sacraments and save a sincere non-Catholic seeking out the Lord's will. Thanks for telling me what I really believe, Josh. *tongue in cheek*

[AugustineA]

Mortify wishes all non catholics would go to hell....It bothers him greatly the thought of someone not catholic going to heaven....Only if we could go back to the good olé days....I love religion....

 

Yeahhhh.. did I miss something? That seems a rather out of place criticism. We need to be careful about making accusatory remarks about each other, especially in regards to each other's faith. :)

 

Anyyyhow. It's highly unlikely isn't it. Saints are simply people confirmed by the Church to have exceptional holiness, and if everyone in heaven is perfect, it follows that they're all now saints. If we're not ready to go around confirming that every good Catholic and their aunt are now Saints, which is plausible but not practical, it doesn't seem like we have any recourse to start recognizing non-Catholics. Although, the Church may yet prove me wrong, which is plausible and in many cases practical. :P

[Guest]

No I was talking about Mortify you're Mortify 2.....Peace playboy.....

[reminiscere]

Paul VI didn't say they were saints and didn't canonize them, he only said they were worthy of mention.

 

Luckily, the dogmatic Council of Florence answers this question:

 

nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church