Saints by the Score
A former editor of The Catholic Herald, Peter Stanford,
has recently expressed in a newspaper article his reservations about the
present Pope's "saint-making", which "has been arguably the greatest revolution
of his papacy, and the most controversial". By 1234, when Rome applied "strict
new rules" to curtail the making of saints, their number had grown to about
10 000. Stanford states that, since then, only 300 new saints had been created
until the 474 saints made by this pope.
Stanford gives more than one possible reason for this unprecedented
spate of saints. "Some cynics link the phenomenon with the financial plight
of the
Vatican," he says. "They have suggested it is the modern
equivalent of the sale of indulgences that precipitated the Protestant
Reformation". Saint-making is evidently a costly business for promoters
of the "cause" of the prospective saint when they petition the Vatican.
To bring a deceased person up to Rome's status of "blessed" (one step short
of sainthood or canonisation) can cost as much as £220 000 (as in the case
Katherine Drexel, founder of the Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament). The
bill for canonising Mother Teresa could top £500 000, says Stanford. "At
a couple of hundred thousand pounds per saint, it is a good way of tackling
the burgeoning debt that got the Vatican Bank . . . into such hot water
in the 1980s." However, Stanford thinks that this financial theory does
not hold water because, as he claims, more than half the money is used
to pay for the preparation of the documents in support of the promoters'
petition. Nevertheless, very large sums go straight into the Vatican's
coffers in the process, as Stanford admits. We suspect that the financial
theory is more watertight than he would have us believe.
Another reason (more implied than spelled out by Stanford)
is the bolstering of the influence of the Papacy when the Pope visits various
Roman Catholic countries. The Pope has felt on his travels, says Stanford,
that "he cannot arrive empty-handed. So invariably he has brought a new
saint with him. A feature of almost every papal visit has been a mass to
canonise a local man or woman. . . . Vatican officials have been hurriedly
trawling through history to find suitable candidates."
The Pope, say his critics, with "his conservative attitudes",
has yet another reason for making saints - to reinforce his "basic traditional
message". Stanford claims: "Not one of the men chosen [for sainthood] has
ever said anything with which he might have disagreed." Stanford concludes: "But
whether becoming a saint still carries the cachet it once did, or whether
John Paul II has devalued it into an expensive PR exercise for Church policies,
is a question that [Roman] Catholicism urgently needs to address."
A more serious matter is the utter falsity of its saint-making.
Whatever policies and politics operate in the process, the saints made
by the Pope, not being saints in the Scriptural sense, are no saints. In
fact, as James Begg demonstrates in his Handbook of Popery, some
of Rome's greatest saints have been the most wicked of men.
What a great blessing it is in this dark world that every
one of God's born-again, believing people is a saint! His saints
are many times more than Rome's thousands of pseudo-saints, for they
amount to a total which no man can number. These are the saints with
whom Rome makes war (Rev 13:7). She has "shed the blood of the saints" and
is "drunken with the blood of the saints" (Rev 16:6, 17:6). The prayers
of these saints for the downfall of Antichrist will yet be answered,
with the result that the cry shall be heard universally, "Babylon is
fallen, is fallen!"
NMR
Another Cardinal
About 1000 Roman Catholics gave a "rapturous reception" to
Archbishop Keith O'Brien at "a mass of thanksgiving" held in Edinburgh
to mark his elevation to the rank of Cardinal by the Pope (The Scotsman,
30 September 2003). He was "exhilarated" and, with the degree of modesty
expected of a potential "prince of the Church", took this demonstration
as an evidence of how much he was appreciated by the people. He expressed
the view that the creation once again of a Cardinal in Scotland, with its
fewer than one million Roman Catholics, indicated how Scotland was regarded
by the Pope and his advisers (The Daily Telegraph, 30 September
2003).
The self-portrait of O'Brien as a progressive in favour of
debate and of the evolution of Romanism in a liberal direction in matters
which he considered did not belong to "the deposit of faith" but merely
to "Church law" was somewhat blotted at a later mass (under, his critics
allege, orders from Rome). He declared: "I accept and intend to defend
the law on celibacy as it is proposed by the Magisterium of the Catholic
Church; I accept and promise to defend the ecclesiastical teaching about
the immorality of the homosexual act; I accept and promise to promulgate
always and everywhere what the Church's Magisterium teaches on contraception".
He later told The Scotsman (11 October 2003) that, having publicly
restated his "loyalty to the Church, its teachings and the Pope", he was
calling on "Catholics everywhere" to join with him to respect the decisions
of the Pope and to "demonstrate their own loyalty by not questioning them".
This third Cardinal in Scotland since the Reformation is
part of that Papal system which is determined by all means to keep the
minds and souls of men in bondage to itself. Whatever cracks or even chasms
are within the system must be plastered over in the interests of the system
itself - without any regard to what is true, whether doctrinally or morally.
We may be sure that the fairly speedy appointment of another Scottish Cardinal
in place of the deceased Cardinal Winning is part of the strategy for keeping
a high profile for Romanism in Scottish society and public life. We may
be just as sure that the choice as Cardinal of Keith O'Brien rather than
of the already more "conservative" Mario Conti of Glasgow - with the constraint
this appointment and its conditions puts on O'Brien - is part of the policy
for attempting to retain Rome's centralised control of the world-wide organisation.
Every opportunity is taken in the media to keep Romanism
before the population as the Church and to present it in the most
favourable light. In spite of all the bad publicity concerning immoral
practices long condoned or covered up, the representatives of Romanism
continue to claim the moral high ground, and people like the Archbishop
of Birmingham complain with an air of injured innocence concerning the "anti-Catholic
bias" of the BBC in programmes recalling past scandals. If any have reason
to complain of bias against them in the BBC and in the media in general
it is those who endeavour to maintain the doctrines and practices of the
Word of God.
It is sad to see the place taken by and given to the Roman
hierarchy in this land of Reformation and Covenants and centuries of gospel
blessing. But, while we ought to be driven to repentance and to prayer,
we need not be despondent in spite of the weakness of the Protestant witness
to the truth in Scotland today. "For the weapons of our warfare are not
carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds" (2
Cor 10:4). In his notes on Stillingfleet's The Doctrines and Practices
of the Church of Rome Truly Represented, William Cunningham wrote: "The
Mystery of Iniquity indeed began to work in the days of the apostles, but
Popery, in all its systematic completeness, and in all its ruinous tendencies,
was not fully formed till many centuries afterwards; and as its formation
and development were subsequent to the general propagation of Christianity,
so we know from the Word of God that its destruction will precede and usher
in 'the glory of the latter days'".
HMC