Beatification: the first step towards canonization and public veneration (sainthood)


Last May’s announcement by Pope Benedict XVI that his predecessor’s beatification would be effectively fast tracked has been followed by a wall of silence from The Vatican. This would be puzzling, except for the secretive nature by which the Catholic Church has chosen to conduct its affairs over the last 20 years. In a world which, for all its faults has become more open and information friendly since the 1980s, the public’s perception of the lack of accountability of the Church in Rome is becoming a rod with which the Church is flagellating its own back.





The beatification if Pope John-Paul II (and there is no need to bring into question his greatness at this point) is fundamentally unethical by the Catholic Church’s own standards as it flies in the face of centuries of tradition.


1. A suitable interval (5 to 7 years) must be observed before the beatification process can begin – this was deliberately established by The Church as a safeguard against a wave of support for an individual who later proved to be a fraud. In fairness, Pope John Paul II himself contracted the interval to 4 years in the case of Mother Theresa.
Inthis case it was almost immediate


2. There needs to be ‘irrefutable evidence’ that, since death, the individual has performed at least one miracle (2 by the time of sainthood): this is significant in that it prevents well-meaning mortals (like Gandhi or from being canonized while holding the door open for good Christians.

There have been no postumous miracles attributed to John Paul II


3. A support group must approach their local bishop
Didn't happen

4. After Rome’s approval, an investigation is launched
There has, to date been no publically announced investigation

5. The findings are then sent to the ‘Congregation for the Causes of Saints’ for their endorsement
To date, no such congregation has met regarding John-Paul IIs specific case

6. The case is presented to The Pope
Didn't need to be, it was his idea


7. After this, an individual is nominated to present the worst possible case against the nominee (The origin of the phrase ‘Devil’s Advocate’). In the case of Mother Theresa, bizarrely, it was Christopher Hitchens; a Vanity Fair writer whose sole qualification for the job was based on a book he wrote called ‘Missionary Position’.

Nobody has yet been nominated to act as Advocatus Diaboli for J-P.


Are we soon to get to the stage whereby Popes can issue beatifications the way presidents issue pardons?


That The Holy Catholic Church has chosen to ignore its own doctrine may be seen as nothing more than another example of well documented ecumenical hypocrisy and to be fair, to a non-catholic, such rituals and traditions are of little intrinsic interest. Indeed, none of this would matter, were it not for the absolutely intransigent attitude of the Roman Catholic hierarchy towards many of its more dangerous and stupefying doctrines. Thousands of people in the developing world are dying because they are not able to use condoms; others enduring unabashed misery because of abortion adjudication. Yet they see no problem with bypassing their own laws when it comes to ‘promoting’ one of their own.


Until the Catholic Church achieves a greater level of transparency, they will not be able to lose the labels attached by myself and other, better qualified critics. As I’ve said, I hold no strong views about the Pope getting his ‘due’, but if really is such a straightforward matter to ‘modernise’ their canonization doctrine, surely they can at least attempt to move with the times in other regards.



Prove me wrong……please!