Beatification cause advanced for Archbishop Romero

[struggle4progress]

<snip> The Archbishop of San Salvador was shot and killed as he celebrated Mass in a hospital chapel on March 24, 1980. The assassination came at the height of the civil war in that country, and during the funeral of the beloved archbishop, on March 30, soldiers fired into the congregation, killing and wounding dozens of the faithful. An investigation under UN auspices determined that the Salvadoran military had ordered the prelate's death.

From the time of his appointment in 1977, Archbishop Romero had clashed frequently with the military regime governing El Saladaor at that time. He was killed soon after making an appeal to soldiers to disobey orders to kill.

Bishop Vincenzo Paglia of Terni, Italy, who is now the postulator for the Romero cause, says that he expects soon to complete a "position" that will be presented to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, making the case that Archbishop Romero was a martyr for the faith. This "position" would then be studied by a panel of theologians, who in turn would submit their judgment to the prelates who serve on that Congregation. That process could take roughly six months, the postulator estimated.

The cause for Archbishop Romero's beatification was opened in 1993, in San Salvador. The process began with an examination of his writings and speeches, and testimony from his colleagues and acquaintances. The results of that investigation were conveyed to the Vatican in 1997. At that point, the process was slowed by an investigation undertaken by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. <snip>

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=35989

[DemBones DemBones]

1. I just happen to have a Romero quote

in my sig line. O8)

[CBHagman]

2. I'm happy to hear of this.

One of the heroes of the 20th century. I think it's just too easy to forget what discipline and courage it took civil rights leaders and advocates for the poor to speak out, sometimes paying with their lives, during the 20th century.

For those of you who might be interested, there's a film of Romero's experiences during the last few years of his life. Raul Julia, the actor who played the title role in "Romero," actually wore the archbishop's own glasses while filming, or so I've heard.

[Matilda]

3. Far more deserving than people like Josemaria Escriva (Opus Dei).

Should have been begun before this.

And while they're about it, let's move on to the canonisation of
John XXIII - that's long overdue.


Edit: typo

[Cuban_Liberal]

4. Agree with both points.

:)

[DemBones DemBones]

5. I checked -- Romero died in 1980, Escriva in 1975,

so it stands to reason that Escriva was canonized first, even though we all like Romero better.

Escriva did inspire, and continues to inspire, many. There was a huge turnout in Rome when he was canonized. Maybe a lot of people have been helped by Opus Dei, despite the claims of bad people in its leadership. I personally do not know.

As for Pope John XXIII, who died way back in 1963, his cause is tied to the cause of Pope Pius XII, who died in 1958. When Pope John died, there was a lot of sentiment to make him a saint by acclamation, while Vatican II was going on. BUT. . .

"The Vatican Congregation for the Causes of Saints was less than enthusiastic about the proposal because it meant the saintmaking process was being snatched out of its hands by the Council participants. That congregation had been established four centuries earlier to prevent mistakes and improvisations in creating saints. Each candidate's private and public life was to be examined meticulously. Particularly in the case of popes this meant years spent gathering the necessary documentation. The process, it was argued, should not be short-circuited by acclamation."

"The potential conflict over the proposal to acclaim John XXIII a saint was avoided when Paul VI announced that the process would be initiated simultaneously on behalf of Pius XII as well. The decision was a vindication of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints and also suggested continuity between the two popes: If Pope John had convoked the Council, Pius had done much to prepare it. (Pius's encyclicals, for example, are often quoted in conciliar documents.)"

"The two investigations are proceeding separately but the Vatican could decide to announce the results simultaneously."


I also learned more about popes as saints:

"In his ground-breaking 1990 book Making Saints: How the Catholic Church Determines Who Becomes a Saint, Who Doesn't, and Why, journalist Kenneth L. Woodward devotes a chapter to the problems about making popes saints. He observes that, of John XXIII's 260 predecessors, 81 are recognized as saints. Of Peter's first 48 successors, 47 are saints. Of the remainder, 30 of the saints died before 1100 and therefore before the Church developed even elementary procedures for investigating their lives."

"In the past 900 years, only three popes have been recognized as saints. One was Celestine V, a monk who abdicated in 1294 after only five months in office. He was canonized in 1313. Since formal canonization procedures were organized in 1588, only two popes have been canonized: Pius V (1566-1572), who implemented the teachings of the Council of Trent, and Pius X (1903-1914)."


Amazing how much info can be found so quickly online!

The whole article on Pope John XXIII is at

http://www.americancatholic.org/Messenger/Nov1996/feature1.asp

Hope that helps! :hi:

[Matilda]

6. I'm afraid I don't care for Escriva's brand of Catholicism.

Narrow, and way too doctrinaire. I don't care for the spying and
tale-telling they go in for either.

But Pope John's arms were opened wide to embrace everyone, regardless
of their religion. He was a truly Christian man.

It's the heart that's important.

[DemBones DemBones]

7. Article: "A Shepherd of the Poor: Remembering Oscar Romero"

on the 25th anniversary of his death.

An excerpt from the middle of the article:


"Romero was a surprise in history. The poor never expected him to take their side and the elites of church and state felt betrayed. He was a compromise candidate elected to head the bishop's episcopacy by conservative fellow bishops. He was predictable, an orthodox, pious bookworm who was known to criticize the progressive liberation theology clergy so aligned with the impoverished farmers seeking land reform. But an event would take place within three weeks of his election that would transform this ascetic and timid man.

The new archbishop's first priest, Rutilio Grande, was ambushed and killed along with two parishioners. Grande was a target because he defended the peasant's rights to organize farm cooperatives. He said that the dogs of the big landowners ate better food than the campesino children whose fathers worked their fields.

The night Romero drove out of the capitol to Paisnal to view Grande's body and the old man and seven year old who were killed with him, marked his change. In a packed country church Romero encountered the silent endurance of peasants who were facing rising terror. Their eyes asked the question only he could answer: Will you stand with us as Rutilio did? Romero's "yes" was in deeds. The peasants had asked for a good shepherd and that night they received one.

Romero already understood the church is more than the hierarchy, Rome, theologians or clerics—more than an institution—but that night he experienced the people as church. "God needs the people themselves," he said, "to save the world... The world of the poor teaches us that liberation will arrive only when the poor are not simply on the receiving end of hand-outs from governments or from the churches, but when they themselves are the masters and protagonists of their own struggle for liberation."


http://www.bruderhof.com/articles/golden-romero.htm?source=DailyDig