St. Michael

[qfnol31]

Eh, I like St. Alphonsus' feast day on the day it is, it's my birthday!

[jasJis]

Bro Adam,
I understand your problem and pain and the danger that undermining the authority of the Church exposes many too. I've taught religion to teens for years and do not recommend PhatMass to them.

The Church is the Source, the Light, and the abode of the Holy Spirit on earth, and serves God to enable us to have an intimate relationship with His Son, our Lord, Jesus the Christ. I will follow the Church because it has lead me to Christ. Though I have doubts and worries sometimes, I know what I have found and know there is nowhere else for me to go.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote]Raphael,
with all due respect, I'll believe that Philomena being raised in succession by the Church then is appropo now.
[/quote]

I didn't even mention Philomena. I don't know what this is about. I was simply trying to state a historical fact of the Church relevant to the discussion.

[cmotherofpirl]

Phishy people are great for pushing Catholics out the door, becuase if they are Catholic, I don't want to be.

[Brother Adam]

Book suggestion: More Catholic Than the Pope: An Inside Look at Extreme Traditionalism by Patrick Madrid and Pete Vere JCL

[MichaelFilo]

All saints who were cannonized did exist. All saints who were paryed to did exist, for their intercession is known. It would be pointless to say that ANY of the saints who died didn't exist, because no one would pray to a saint who didn't interceed or help them. The fact of the matter is, just because the Church took them off the calander, it wasn't because of any lack of belief in their existance, but instead in the fact of lack of knowledge about them. It would be unsensable to hold a mass for St. X if all we know about St. X is that at some point people prayed to St. X, and some may still pray to St. X. I don't think you would give the title Saint to a non-Saint. It is a horrible claim to make to say that it is possible some saints didn't exist, for then oen maybe just as assured about the majority of the saints. You must understand there are MANY saints, and most have very little history to prove their existance, if any, outside the traditions passed down. So, it is better to say, all the saints who have gone from the calander existed but since very little is known about them (since tradition can be passed down and messed up) the Church removed them.

God bless,

Mikey

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Oct 1 2004, 06:14 PM'] Book suggestion: More Catholic Than the Pope: An Inside Look at Extreme Traditionalism by Patrick Madrid and Pete Vere JCL [/quote]
Interesting. I would have ordered that book had I known of it's existence. In a few days I will have my own copy of "What Went Wrong with Vatican II" and "No Salvation Outside the Church?".

[Donna]

Raphael, right, it was I who was talking about Philomena, because she was placed, in the 1960's, into the category of the...no-longer-quite-right (my inexact term).

But I answered you in part based on this:

[i]I did not mean to imply that all saints who were made so by legend are false saints, but that, with some such saints, the Church has done retrospective study and determined that there was not sufficient evidence in the first place.[/i]

Now I realize that of Philomena it was said there wasn't enough proof, and so isn't in the category of those proclaimed saints "by legend" instead of formal canonical process.

But the effect - a saint being "demoted" - is the same, to a simple person like me.

With cures and shrines, churches and altars raised and dedicated, archconfraternities already having been raised by Popes (over time) and the cult of Philomena championed by other saints -including popes- Philomena's demotion seems worse than ridiculous, but a scandal.

IMO.

[qfnol31]

Well, something told to me by a convert Priest from the Eastern Orthodox. He said that obviously there is a Saint that we're praying to because our prayers work (this was in regards to Christopher). St. Christopher as we know him isn't really a Saint, but there is a Saint to whom our prayers are going for the intercession works as well. When we "demote a Saint" it's more taking them off the calendar and saying that the stories about them aren't necessarily true. It's not saying that we can't still have devotions to them.

[Pio Nono]

JMJU
10/2 - Guardian Angels

If any saint was removed from the calendar, it was not because their existence was called into question, but because the stories surrounding their lives could not be corroborated historically. "Christopher" is Greek for Christ-bearer, and oddly enough, the story is that he "bore Christ" across a river. Is there reason to think that this was all made up? Of course not; it's just that Holy Mother Church has decided that a public cult is no longer necessary.

My patron saint (Apollinarius of Ravenna) was just recently placed back onto the general calendar; St. Expedite and St. Cloud were all removed from the calendar as well. Holy Mother Church did this because she believed that a public cult to them no longer met the worldwide needs of the Church. Does that prevent a particular parish, diocese or nation from celebrating a feast in honor of these people? Not at all - even after his removal from the general calendar, St. Apollinarius' feast day remained huge in Ravenna.

[Pio Nono]

JMJ
10/2 - Guardian Angels

BTW, don't let legends guide your faith with regards to the saints. HOWEVER, neither should you let an Enlightenment-based rationalism guide your faith, which says that without historical corroboration of a saint's existence, he obviously did not exist.

Besides, there are certain legends that are healthy to believe, whether they are true or not. The legend of St. Christopher is perfectly fine to believe in, as well as to disbelieve. However, certain legends are not cool at all, such as the legend that St. Paul baptized a talking lion (trust me, it was popular at one point).

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Well said, Pio Nono.