Doug Baldwin Represented an Era of Seahawks Football

Points to Ponder:

Nine out of ten of what we call new ideas are simply old mistakes. [GK Chesterton]

On the Infallibility of Papal Canonizations of Saints:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)

This material was mostly compiled in late 2018 and early 2019 and finally completed yesterday. Having noted that, I cannot believe I have to do this with Catholics who should know better. However, if I learned anything in twenty odd years of involvement in these matters, it is that those who claim to be so Catholic so often are ignorant of the basics of theology and other matters. This is certainly the case for those who claim to be More Faithful Than Thou who try to parse out or separate papal canonizations into different eras or seek to find ways to downplay or dismiss modern canonizations. The purpose of this note is to look at the subject of papal canonizations and why logically in Catholic theology they have to be infallible, period. Let us start with the standard formula used in a canonization ceremony:

In honor of the Holy Trinity, for the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the increase of the Christian life, with the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul and of Our Own, after long reflection, having invoked divine assistance many times and listened to the opinion of many of our Brothers in the Episcopate, We declare and define as Saint Blessed N. and inscribe his/her name in the list of the saints and establish that throughout the Church they be devoutly honored among the saints.{1}

I realize that formularies are not the be-all and end-all on these things but it is made manifest by the Pope in canonizing someone that they are defining their presence in heaven and placing an obligation on the faithful to reverence the canonized person as such henceforth in perpetuity. None of this is consistent with the claims of those who would rashly assert that such proclamations are not definitive. As canonizations of saints became centralized in the papacy in the second millennium{2}, along with the developing notion of church and papal infallibility, the understanding that papal canonizations would be infallible over time came about. The earliest explicit exponent of this belief that I am aware of is St. Thomas Aquinas who had this to say on the matter (all emphasis is mine):

Honor we show the saints is a certain profession of faith by which we believe in their glory, and it is to be piously believed that even in this the judgment of the Church is not able to err.{3} 

As the process of canonization became more centralized over time, "bishops were designated as the primary ecclesiastical authorities to determine the historical veracity of martyrs and confessors"{4} and the bishops were "licensed to confer a kind of beatification on a meritorious individual within their dioceses."{5} From there, "[c]ults of an officially recognized martyr or confessor could transfer (translatio) the saint's body to a designated shrine location and select a festival date on which liturgical rites could be performed annually. The act of translating a saint's body to an altar or shrine came to be interpreted as the act of canonization."{6} Over time, cults spread across various dioceses as a result of both veneration by believers as well as promotion by church authorities. As the cults of saints grew, profiteers decided to get in on the act and it became so pervasive that church councils begin to address the matter. The Council of Mainz in 813 "decreed that a body could be moved only by permission of the relevant bishop and provincial synod and after informing the secular authority."{7}

While the first papal canonization on record is from 993 AD, "the first universal canonization occurred in 1041, with a papal bull addressing all nations and languages, not just clergy and selected ethno-cultural groups."{8} The reasons for increasing appeals to the papacy to validate canonizations was "initially done to introduce Church oversight and doctrinal rigor into beatification, a process that continued to be controlled by the bishops at the local level."{9} It was a status symbol basically to seek the pope's approval because then the act carried the greater spiritual weight and stature of the Roman Church. And of course "the demand for papal canonization corresponded to the rise in power and prestige of the papacy in Rome."{10}

Prior to the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), there were only a few decrees of importance pertaining to the canonization of saints. The first was from the Fifth Council of Carthage (401) concerning the verification of shrines by the local bishop to ensure that they had a connexion with a true martyr and to insist that no one be venerated as a martyr without a reasonable basis of historical evidence. The second is the aforementioned Council of Mainz (813). The papacy of Pope Alexander III (1159-1181) saw the further crystallization of basic principles including the reservation of canonization to the papacy{11} with the formulation of customs that would later be set forth in formal decrees. In the aftermath of the Council of Trent, the following was included in a Profession of Faith by Pope Paul IV:

I steadfastly hold that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls therein detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful. Likewise, that the saints, reigning together with Christ, are to be honored and invoked, and that they offer prayers to God for us, and that their relics are to be venerated.{12}

If you read the words carefully, you will see that the Tridentine Profession of Faith, it is mandated that the saints are to be honoured and invoked as well as their relics venerated. If it is a matter of faith that the saints are to be honored and invoked, and that they offer prayers to God for us, and that their relics are to be venerated, then that means the determination of saints is logically a matter with a connection to dogma. What does this mean if the Church could err in canonizing saints?

To suppose that the Church can err in canonizing, is a sin, or is heresy, according to St. Bonaventure, Bellarmine, and others; or at least next door to heresy, according to Suarez, Azorius, Gotti, etc.; because the Sovereign Pontiff, according to St. Thomas, is guided by the infallible influence of the Holy Ghost in an especial way when canonizing saints.{13} 

This was the standard view by all reputable theologians and doctors throughout the post-Tridentine period. At the First Vatican Council, one of the factors involved in addressing the subject of papal infallibility was the extent of that infallibility. On the issue of truths necessary for guarding the faith even though not themselves formally revealed, the Relator Bishop Vincent Gasser said the following:

'All Catholic theologians completely agree that the Church, in her authentic proposal and definition of truths of this sort, is infallible,' such that to deny this infallibility would be a very grave error. A diversity of opinion turns only on the degree of certitude, i.e., on whether the infallibility in proposing these truths--and therefore in proscribing errors through censures inferior to the note of heresy--should be considered a dogma of faith, so that to deny this infallibility to the Church would be heretical, or whether it is a truth not revealed in itself but one deduced from revealed dogma and as such is only theologically certain.{14}

In other words, there was a consensus amongst Catholic theologians that the Church is infallible in more than matters of faith and the only diversity of opinion was whether denying this infallibility would be heretical or whether it was merely deduced from revealed dogma and as such is only theologically certain. What was the decision of the Deputation on how to handle this matter?

[I]t has seemed to members of the Deputation, by unanimous agreement, that this question should not be defined, at least not now, but should be left in the state in which it presently is.{15}

If you read carefully, you will see that Bishop Gasser was not saying that the proposed dogmatic formula intended to leave in a state of indecision the question of whether the Pope is infallible in defining both secondary truths as well as formal revealed truths. What was intended to be left in the state in which it presently is is only the question of the specific theological qualification of the teaching; namely, if it is de fide or just theologically certain. Irrespective of the theological qualification however, it is clear that there is certainty and the requirement for all Catholics to hold firmly that the Pope is infallible in defining secondary doctrines necessary for guarding and expounding the deposit of faith. Among these secondary truths is the canonization of saints.

So by 1870 and prior to the promulgation of Pastor Aeternus by the Fathers of the First Vatican Council, this matter was already one that was not subject to theological speculation. The aforementioned factor was also noted as follows in the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia:

Is the pope infallible in issuing a decree of canonization? Most theologians answer in the affirmative. It is the opinion of St. Antoninus, Melchior Cano, Suarez, Bellarmine, Bañez, Vasquez, and, among the canonists, of Gonzales Tellez, Fagnanus, Schmalzgrüber, Barbosa, Reiffenstül, Covarruvias (Variar. resol., I, x, no 13), Albitius (De Inconstantiâ in fide, xi, no 205), Petra (Comm. in Const. Apost., I, in notes to Const. I, Alex., III, no 17 sqq.), Joannes a S. Thomâ (on II-II, Q. I, disp. 9, a. 2), Silvester (Summa, s.v. Canonizatio), Del Bene (De Officio Inquisit. II, dub. 253), and many others. In Quodlib. IX, a. 16, St. Thomas says: 'Since the honour we pay the saints is in a certain sense a profession of faith, i.e., a belief in the glory of the Saints [quâ sanctorum gloriam credimus] we must piously believe that in this matter also the judgment of the Church is not liable to error.' These words of St. Thomas, as is evident from the authorities just cited, all favouring a positive infallibility, have been interpreted by his school in favour of papal infallibility in the matter of canonization, and this interpretation is supported by several other passages in the same Quodlibet. This infallibility, however according to the holy doctor, is only a point of pious belief. Theologians generally agree as to the fact of papal infallibility in this matter of canonization, but disagree as to the quality of certitude due to a papal decree in such matter. In the opinion of some it is of faith (Arriaga, De fide, disp. 9, p. 5, no 27); others hold that to refuse assent to such a judgment of the Holy See would be both impious and rash, as Francisco Suárez (De fide, disp. 5 p. 8, no 8); many more (and this is the general view) hold such a pronouncement to be theologically certain, not being of Divine Faith as its purport has not been immediately revealed, nor of ecclesiastical Faith as having thus far not been defined by the Church.{16} 

And in the words of pre-Vatican II dogmatic theologian Gerardus van Noort:

Canonization (formal) is the final and definitive decree by which the sovereign pontiff declares that someone has been admitted to heaven and is to be venerated by everyone, at least in the sense that all the faithful are held to consider the person a saint worthy of public veneration... Infallibility is claimed for canonization only; a decree of beatification, which in the eyes of the Church is not definitive but may still be rescinded, is to be considered morally certain indeed, but not infallible.{17}

In other words, there was prior to the Second Vatican Council a theological consensus that secondary objects of infallibility were infallible. And on the scope of infallibility, the Second Vatican Council had the following to say in one of its dogmatic constitutions:

[T]his infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine of faith and morals, extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends, which must be religiously guarded and faithfully expounded.{18}

Up to this point, the teaching was long proposed over the course of centuries as at least theologically certain. By including this teaching in a Dogmatic Constitution of an Ecumenical Council, this simply underscored that the aforementioned teaching was definitive by virtue of the Ordinary Magisterium and faithful Catholics were bound to accept it with what is called ecclesiastical faith (Lat. fides ecclesiastica). This understanding was one explicitly delineated in a declaration by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in the years following the Second Vatican Council:

According to Catholic doctrine, the infallibility of the Church's Magisterium extends not only to the deposit of faith but also to those matters without which that deposit cannot be rightly preserved and expounded. (Cf. Vatican Council II: Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, 25; Const. Decr. Decl., p. 139.){19}

And finally, the CDF has explicitly stated that among the truths connected to revelation to be held definitively but which cannot be declared matters of dogma include the following:

[T]he legitimacy of the election of the Supreme Pontiff or of the celebration of an ecumenical council, the canonizations of saints (dogmatic facts), the declaration of Pope Leo XIII in the Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations.{20}

In summary, the overwhelming evidence over the centuries from the time that canonizations of saints became centralized in the papacy is that the infallibility of the church extends not only to matters properly considered de fide but also matters which pertain to the deposit of faith by logical extension. Among these areas required for the preservation and expounding of the deposit of faith is the canonizations of saints. And as the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council settled this matter doctrinally, the only response of faithful Catholics is the assent of ecclesiastical faith: something not present in the schismatics who by denying this fundamental principle of the Catholic faith are themselves proximate to heresy.

If anyone dared to assert that the pontiff had erred in this or that canonization, we shall say that he is, if not a heretic, at least temerarious, a giver of scandal to the whole Church, an insulter of the saints, a favorer of those heretics who deny the Church's authority in canonizing saints, savoring of heresy by giving unbelievers an occasion to mock the faithful, the assertor of an erroneous opinion and liable to very grave penalties. [Pope Benedict XIV: Excerpt from De Canonisione Sanctorum 1.I c.43 n.3; c.45 n.28. (circa ante-1758)]

Notes:

{1} The Concluding Canonization Formulary Used By Popes When Canonizing Saints

{2} The first papal canonization was of Ulrich, bishop of Augsburg by Pope John XV in 993 AD at the Lateran Council held that year.

{3} St. Thomas Aquinas: Quodl. 9:8:16 (circa ante 1274)

{4} Eric W. Kemp: From Canonization and Authority in the Western Church (circa 1948) as cited in The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion edited by Rachel M. McCleary, pg 193 (circa 2011).

{5} From The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion edited by Rachel M. McCleary, pg 193 (circa 2011)

{6} Eric W. Kemp: From Canonization and Authority in the Western Church (circa 1948) as cited in The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion edited by Rachel M. McCleary, pg 193 (circa 2011).

{7} Eric W. Kemp: From Canonization and Authority in the Western Church (circa 1948) as cited in The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion edited by Rachel M. McCleary, pg 194 (circa 2011).

{8} Eric W. Kemp: From Canonization and Authority in the Western Church (circa 1948) as cited in The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion edited by Rachel M. McCleary, pg 194 (circa 2011).

{9} Eric W. Kemp: From Canonization and Authority in the Western Church (circa 1948) as cited in The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion edited by Rachel M. McCleary, pg 194 (circa 2011).

{10} Eric W. Kemp: From Canonization and Authority in the Western Church (circa 1948) as cited in The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion edited by Rachel M. McCleary, pg 194 (circa 2011).

{11} While Pope Alexander III did not formally decree this, the last canonization performed by a local bishop preceded his pontificate and he did establish the principles that resulted in his successor Pope Gregory IX decreeing that all canonizations were reserved to the Apostolic See.

{12} Pope Pius IV: Profession of Faith (circa November 13, 1564)

{13} St. Alphonsus Liguori: Excerpt from The Great Means of Salvation and Perfection, pg 23 (circa 1759)

{14} Bishop Vincent Gasser: From His Relatio to the Fathers of the First Vatican Council (circa July 11, 1870)

{15} Bishop Vincent Gasser: From His Relatio to the Fathers of the First Vatican Council (circa July 11, 1870)

{16} Catholic Encyclopedia: Excerpt from the Article Beatification and Canonization (circa 1913)

{17} Mgr. G. Van Noort: Excerpt from Dogmatic Theology 2: Christ’s Church, Westminster, MD: Newman Press, pg 117 (circa 1957)

{18} Second Vatican Council: Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium §25 (circa November 21, 1964)

{19} Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: Declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae §3 (circa June 24, 1973)

{20} Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: From the Doctrinal Commentary on the Professio Fidei (circa July 29, 1998)

The Last Days of Father Schall

Requiem æternam dona eis, Domine
Et lux perpetua luceat eis:
Fidelium animae, per misericordiam Dei,
Requiescant in pace.
Amen.