Byline: Father Richard Gribble

8 min read

Church Documents

Origins Of The Creed

Father Richard Gribble

May 13, 2022 1:59 pm May 13, 2022

8 min read

7300 views

Comments Off

8 min read

Each Sunday and solemnity Catholics profess at the transition between the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. This document of faith succinctly summarizes…

Each Sunday and solemnity Catholics profess at the transition between the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.

This document of faith succinctly summarizes some of the basic teachings of the Church. Unfortunately, however, few of us, when reciting this most important statement of belief and faith, understand its radical nature and countercultural teachings, let alone the Church’s rationale in its creation or its historical origins. While some see the Creed as controversial, others sleepwalk through its recitation, understanding little about the controversies associated with it or why the document was determined necessary for the faithful.

The significance of the Creed in our liturgical celebration necessitates that Catholics know and appreciate how and why the document was created.

The nascent Christian community found itself in a hostile environment that asked many questions and wanted answers. The polytheistic Roman Empire, although it had dealt with the monotheism of Judaism, found the new way of Christianity to be even more problematic.

Not only did proponents of this new religious community refuse to worship the multiple gods of the Romans, but they expressed belief that Jesus, who had been put to death to satisfy the wishes of the Jewish elite, was himself God.

The Hebrew community, as well, from whom all the early followers of Jesus came, could never acknowledge Jesus as Messiah or God. For them, the messianic promise as described by the prophets in Jeremiah 23:5-6 and Micah 5:2-5 was not fulfilled in Jesus’ life.

The belief generally accepted by Jews concerning the Messiah was that he would be a great king who would return Israel to its former greatness, as described by Jeremiah and Micah.

Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, but the prophecy of old was not seemingly fulfilled, leading many to believe Jesus was a false prophet. The image of the Messiah as a Suffering Servant (see Is 42:1-4; 49:1-7; 50:4-7; 52:13—53:12) was not in the Jewish mindset.

The continuing presence of the Roman invaders and the failure of Israel to once again claim the greatness of the Davidic kingdom were clear proof to the Jews that Jesus could not be Cristos, the Messiah. For the Christian community to claim that Jesus was God was even more problematic, as the Hebrew understanding of monotheism would be violated.

This political and religious situation necessitated that the Christian community begin to respond, to better define itself and what followers of Jesus believed. First, early disciples of Christ had to define their experience of Jesus — who was He, what did He teach, and what was His command for his followers? Next, Christians had to clarify their complex understanding of God.

How could God be understood as Trinity and not violate the basic principle of monotheism? Because early Christians had not clearly answered the concerns and questions of those around them and defined their theology, many misunderstandings and incorrect assumptions about this new faith arose. Thus it was necessary to correct these errant beliefs in some systematic and formal way.

Christians needed to distinguish themselves from many other competing religious ideas, not only the polytheism of the Romans and the monotheism of the Jews, but also heresies such as Gnosticism and Docetism. Gnosticism was based on a dualism of good and evil where gnosis, knowledge necessary for salvation, was randomly bestowed upon individuals. Salvation, thus, was not determined by God, but was random by nature. Docetism was the belief that Jesus only appeared to be human, similar to a mirage. This heresy arose as a way to explain how Jesus could be simultaneously both human and divine.

Defining Belief

In response to these challenges, several of the early Church Fathers produced various treatises that began to define the Christian understanding of Jesus, God and the Church. From their spiritual roots, the first followers of Jesus looked to the Torah for inspiration and guidance. The famous Shema Israel provided a start: “Here, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord our God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Dt 6:4, RSV).

Within their newfound community there were several important contributors who, through their writings, initiated the process of defining the Christian message.

Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35-107) challenged the heresy of Docetism, forcefully stating that Jesus Christ was both human and divine, a basic tenant of faith for those of the “New Way.”

Justin Martyr (c. 100-165), in his “First Apology,” articulated the baptism formula first proclaimed by Jesus as recorded in Matthew’s Gospel (see 28:19).

Tertullian (160-220) produced “The Rule of Faith,” succinctly bringing together many of the teachings of Christianity.

It was Hippolytus (d.c. 235), however, who gave us the most significant precursor to the Nicene-Constantopolitan Creed in his “Apostolic Tradition,” wherein he provides the Apostles’ Creed, which today is recited to begin the Rosary and is utilized as a great statement of faith.

The aforementioned need of the early Christian community to better define its beliefs and to differentiate itself from competing ideologies and ideas provided the initial impetus for the construction of the Creed, but a more proximate catalyst arose in the early fourth century with the teachings of Arius, a priest from Alexandria, Egypt. In Psalm 2:7, Arius read, “You are my beloved son; today I have begotten you.” In passages in Hebrews 1:5 and 5:5, he found almost the exact same words, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you.”

Arius fell into heresy, reasoning that if Jesus was begotten there was a time He did not exist. Therefore, Jesus could not possibly be divine, since He had a beginning. He concluded that Jesus was a perfect creature, a mediator between God and the world.

Arius’ ideas did not go unchallenged. Athanasius, who became bishop of Alexandria at the time Arius was proclaiming his ideas, totally rejected this heretical view. Rightly, he said that the Son, Jesus, was eternally begotten, and that the Father and the Son were of one substance.

He used the Greek word homoousius, a philosophical term meaning “of one substance,” to describe the relationship between Jesus and the Father. He discounted Arius’ idea that a non-divine person could save mankind. Only God could redeem humanity from the sin of Adam.

The controversy raised by Arius spread throughout the Eastern Church, causing a great furor and leading to the first ecumenical council of the Church, which met at Nicaea (present-day Turkey) in A.D. 325.

The principal work of the council was to condemn the heresy of Arius and to generate a formal written Creed that would express clearly and succinctly what the Church taught about Jesus and his relationship to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Thus the Nicene Creed was produced.

Arius was condemned, and the great statement of faith, the Creed, had been written. But the heretical ideas of Arius not only did not die, but actually spread. In a famous quote, St. Jerome, who produced the Latin Vulgate, once opined, “The world awoke and found itself Arian.”

Most bishops in the Eastern Church were led astray by the Arian controversy and thus it was necessary for the Church to once again reassert itself in a public way. Led by the Cappadocian Fathers, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory Nazianzus, the bishops once again assembled in an ecumenical council at Constantinople in 381.

A Statement of Faith

Discussions at the council centered on describing that which was common, ousia, and that which was proper hypostases to each member of the Trinity. In the process the council fathers produced an updated Creed that clarified the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Arianism was finally defeated, and the Church had a statement of faith which we continue to use today in our celebrations of the Eucharist.

For almost 1,700 years the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed has served the Church as a statement of faith that articulates our belief in the Trinity, the relationship of its members, and the importance and significance of the Church as one, holy, Catholic and apostolic.

When reciting the Creed each week, however, few of us understand the rationale for its creation and the history behind it. A greater appreciation for the development of this great statement of faith can, hopefully, help us to profess and live its teachings better in our daily lives.

Father Richard Gribble is a member of the Congregation of Holy Cross.

Comments Off

9 min read

Mary

Mary’s Assumption

Father Richard Gribble

March 8, 2022 10:53 pm March 8, 2022

9 min read

15086 views

Comments Off

9 min read

The sacred Tradition of the Church plays an important role in the daily celebration of our faith. Linked integrally with Scripture and the magisterium, the Tradition is God’s revelation and…

The sacred Tradition of the Church plays an important role in the daily celebration of our faith.

Linked integrally with Scripture and the magisterium, the Tradition is God’s revelation and thus acts as a source from which our knowledge and practice of the Faith is drawn. The feast of the Assumption, possibly the oldest celebration of the Virgin Mary, is rooted in the Tradition of Christian practice, supported by magisterial teaching and defined as one of four Marian dogmas.

Although Scripture makes no direct reference to the bodily ascension of Mary to heaven, several passages speak of the great dignity of her life, lending support to the idea that Jesus would have continued to reveal His glory by removing the corruption of the grave and extending the privilege of the Assumption to His mother. In the Hebrew Scriptures, the Song of Songs contains passages which some scholars today say are prophetical references to Mary. We read, “Arise, my friend, my beautiful one, and come!” (2:10). Also, “Daughters see her and call her happy, queens and concubines, and they praise her” (6:9). The New Testament also provides evidence supportive of Mary’s special privilege. Gabriel’s greeting, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women” (Lk 1:28,42), and Revelation 12:1, in its description of “a woman clothed with the sun,” are illustrative.

The Dormition

The silence of history and Scripture concerning the death of Mary, coupled with the definition at the Council of Ephesus (431) of Mary as the Theotokos (Mother of God), most probably were the catalysts behind the rise of a wealth of apocryphal literature descriptive of the dormition (falling asleep) of the Virgin.

The title and the idea of “the sleep of Mary” is more formally known as “the Dormition of Mary.” (Dormition comes from the Latin dormire, meaning “to sleep.”) The title dormition can be misleading because it seems to focus more on the death and burial of Mary. However, the belief surrounding the dormition is intrinsically linked with the assumption of our Blessed Mother, body and soul, into heaven.

One body of apocrypha from the fourth and fifth centuries, attributed to one Leucius (whom Pope Gelasius I condemned in 494 as “a pupil of the devil”) is titled De transitu Mariae (“The Passing of Mary”). Transitus Beatae Mariae Virginis, falsely attributed to St. Melito of Sardis, was another popular account of the Virgin’s death.

The chief authority for information on Mary’s death comes from St. John Damascene (d. c. 750), who used the otherwise unknown scholar Euthymius for his data. Pulcheria, the wife of Emperor Marcian (450-457), ordered the construction of a church in a suburb of Constantinople called Blachenae to which she wanted brought the earthly remains of Mary. In speaking with Bishop Juvenal of Jerusalem during the Council of Chalcedon (451), the empress was informed that the Virgin’s body was not in Jerusalem. Buried in the Garden of Gethsemane in the presence of the apostles, save Thomas, it was discovered three days later, when the apostles came to venerate her body, that the tomb was empty. It was concluded that Jesus had taken His mother to heaven. These apocryphal accounts, although they contain no historical foundation, nevertheless serve an important function in demonstrating what the people believed, which became important for the development of the Tradition of the Church.

“Day of Mary Mother of God”

As with many Church feasts, the liturgical celebration of the Assumption began its evolution in the East. Church calendars of the ancient Armenian and Ethiopian Churches, as well as the schismatic Nestorian and Monophysite communities, contain a date to commemorate Mary’s death, which gives evidence that the feast had deep roots, even before the definition of Mary as Mother of God proclaimed at Ephesus.

The first concrete evidence which speaks of a Marian celebration on Aug. 15 is found in a mid-fifth century Lectionary in Jerusalem calling the feast “Day of Mary Mother of God.” This was transformed into a commemoration of the dormitio (falling asleep), which was extended to the entire Byzantine empire by Emperor Maurice in the late sixth century. Additional evidence to the widespread celebration of Mary’s dormition is found in the sermons of Modestus, Patriach of Jerusalem (d. c. 634); Andrew of Crete (d. c. 720); and Germanus, Patriach of Constantinople (d. c. 733). All testify to a feast celebrated to honor Mary’s death and her assumption.

A Gallic liturgy of the mid-sixth century is the first evidence of the celebration of the Assumption in the Western Church. This feast, held on Jan. 18, was called in a seventh-century Sacramentary the “Feast of Mary’s Assumption.” St. Gregory of Tours (d. c. 596), in his treatise “On the Glory of the Martyrs,” affirms Mary’s assumption: “The Lord bade the sacred body [of Mary] be borne aloft on a cloud and carried to paradise, where, reunited to the soul, and rejoicing with His elect, it enjoys the good things of eternity in unending bliss.”

Eastern influence led to the introduction of the feast at Rome in the mid-seventh century. Proclaimed as Natale Sanctae Mariae, this celebration was held, again as in the East, on Aug. 15. Pope Sergius I (r. 687-701), a Syrian who was instrumental in the introduction of many Eastern customs to the Roman Church, made the celebration a principal feast and added a procession to its liturgy. The Gregorian Sacramentary (Hadrianum) calls the Aug. 15 feast “the Assumption of Holy Mary.” The first prayer of this Mass says that Mary “could not be kept in the chains of death.” Still later, Pope Leo IV, in 847, added an octave to the feast as the celebration spread as far west as Spain.

“Assumed in Body and Soul”

During the medieval period, recognized scholars and leading Church officials continued to promote the celebration of the Assumption. The famous Dominican scholastic St. Thomas Aquinas referenced Psalm 131:8 (132:8 in modern translations), “Arise, Lord, come to your resting place, you and your mighty ark,” in promoting belief in the assumption of Mary, the true ark of God. St. Anthony of Padua, in a 13th-century sermon, stated: “The Lord arose when he ascended to the right hand of the Father. The Ark which he has sanctified arose when the Virgin Mother was assumed to the Heavenly bridal chamber.” Albert the Great, mentor to Aquinas, in commenting upon Luke, Chapter 1, wrote: “It is plain that the Most Blessed Mother of God has been assumed in body and soul beyond the choirs of Angels. And this in every way we believe to be true.”

The feast of the Assumption was a major feast of the 1570 Sacramentary published by Pope Pius V during the Counter-Reformation. Thus the Church, in eliminating abuse and defending Catholic teaching and tradition, reaffirmed its belief in this long-standing feast. The final page to the evolution of the Assumption was written on Nov. 1, 1950, when Pope Pius XII, in the apostolic constitution Munificentissimus Deus, stated, “We pronounce, declare and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.”

Father Richard Gribble is a member of the Congregation of Holy Cross and a professor of religious studies at Stonehill College in Easton, Massachusetts. He holds a Ph.D. from The Catholic University of America.

The Perfect Model of Discipleship

The historical evolution of the feast of the Assumption is incomplete without some reflection on this celebration’s significance for people today. Mary’s role as the supreme model to follow in our common vocation to holiness and discipleship finds its ultimate triumph and reward in her assumption. Our certainty of Mary’s return to God, body and soul, prefigures our own resurrection and final union with God. In celebrating Mary’s assumption we not only celebrate the love that God showed her, but in more general terms the love that God has shown to all His children in granting the possibility of final resurrection to all. Jesus’ earthly life brought salvation history to its climax; Mary’s assumption gives us hope that in a constantly changing and ever more complex world God never abandons those who love Him, but rather rewards them with eternal life.

Our attitude must emulate the thanksgiving which was the Blessed Mother’s constant prayer. In her wisdom, the Church uses Mary’s Magnificat (see Lk 1:46-55) as the Gospel in the Eucharistic celebration of the Assumption. Mary knew that God had done great things for her and she was grateful. It is our challenge to express equal gratitude to God for what we receive in our daily lives, both the sorrows and the joys. Mary, the Sorrowful Mother, gave thanks to God and received the special privilege of resurrection. So, too, can all of us find final union with God through lives of thankful praise.

From ancient times the Church has proclaimed lex orendi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief). The feast of the Assumption, in its evolution from the common belief of the faithful, as represented by the proliferation of apocryphal literature to a dogma of the Church, is a manifestation of this time-honored dictum. Mary’s role as the Mother of God and the dignity of her life make the Assumption her privilege as she continues to serve as the perfect model of discipleship for all the faithful.

Comments Off

9 min read

Church Teaching

Why is the Creed Important?

Father Richard Gribble

February 27, 2022 5:37 am February 27, 2022

9 min read

27795 views

Comments Off

9 min read

The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, which Latin-rite Catholics profess each Sunday and solemnity at Mass, is an ancient document from the late fourth century. With the lightning speed with which contemporary society…

The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, which Latin-rite Catholics profess each Sunday and solemnity at Mass, is an ancient document from the late fourth century.

With the lightning speed with which contemporary society moves, it might be logical to ask what relevance a document produced so long ago could have on contemporary life in general and Catholicism more specifically, especially when many “sleepwalk” through its recitation. The age of a document and ignorance of its content and significance are, however, not good indicators of relevance. Rather, it is incumbent upon those who profess such a creed to understand what is being professed and to discover its significance and relevance in our world today.

Trinitarian Belief

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (Part I, Section 2) provides a detailed analysis of every part of the Creed, which is broken down into major sections on teachings on the Father; beliefs concerning the Son, Jesus Christ; a theology of the Holy Spirit; and ecclesiology, the description of the distinctive four marks of the Catholic Church. The Creed opens by expressing belief in God the Creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. The early Church Fathers thus affirm the basic teaching from Genesis that God, the “unmoved mover” of ancient philosophy, is responsible for the world which we encounter about us each day.

After this brief introductory comment about the Father, the Creed enters into its longest and most significant section, which details many important teachings with respect to Jesus Christ. Since, as we recall, it was the heresy of Arianism that challenged the divinity of Christ and was the proximate reason to write the Creed, it is appropriate that the Councils at Nicaea (325) and Constantinople (381) concentrated their teaching on Jesus, the central figure of Christian faith.

First, the Creed clarifies Jesus’ divinity and his relationship to the Father. Rejecting Arius’ interpretation of the biblical passage “today I have begotten you,” the Creed speaks of Jesus as “only begotten,” “born before all time,” “true God from true God.” To clarify further and to make more concrete, this great statement of faith affirms that Jesus was “begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father.” The councils wanted to make absolutely clear that not only was Jesus divine and, therefore, existed before all time, but also that he and the Father were homoousios, of the same substance.

Next, the Creed speaks clearly of the humanity of Jesus. First, we are taught that Jesus was sent from heaven for our salvation. The incarnation of Jesus in the womb of Mary through the power of the Holy Spirit (see Lk 1:26-38) is affirmed. The document then speaks of the Paschal Mystery — the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus. It affirms that he was crucified, was buried and rose on the third day, all as predicted by Scripture. Last, the document affirms that Jesus ascended to the Father and will one day return “to judge the living and the dead.”

Teachings concerning the third person of the Blessed Trinity, the Holy Spirit, conclude this portion of the Creed. The document teaches that the Spirit is Lord and, thus, on the same level as the Father and the Son. The Spirit is described as one “who proceeds from the Father and the Son,” the latter three words filioque, being added at the Third Synod of Council of Toledo in 589. The Profession of Faith clearly states that the Holy Spirit was the inspiration of the prophets.

The Four Marks

After its description of the Trinity and the relationship of its Three Persons, the Creed concludes with a section on ecclesiology, professing what have become known as the four marks of the Church. First, the document affirms that the Church is one. The Catechism teaches that the Church is one because of her source; she is one because of her soul. While the Church has always enjoyed the great diversity which comes from the variety of God’s gifts, the unity of people, the oneness of the Church, is essential (see Nos. 813-814).

The Church is also described as holy. United with Christ, the Church is sanctified through Him. All the activities of the Church are directed toward the sanctification of men and women, an act which makes the Church, by definition, holy (see Nos. 823-827).

Next, the Church is described as Catholic. This is seen in a double sense: First, the concept of Catholic means universal. Where there is Jesus Christ there is the Catholic Church. Second, however, the Church is also Catholic because she has been sent out by Christ on a mission to the whole of humanity (see Nos. 830-831).

Last, the Church is described as apostolic, because she is founded on the apostles. This is manifested in three ways: the Church was and remains built on the foundation of the apostles; with the help of the Spirit the Church keeps and hands on the teaching, the deposit of faith; and “she continues to be taught, sanctified, and guided by the apostles until Christ’s return, through their successors in pastoral office: the college of bishops” (No. 857).

Why Is the Creed Relevant?

Contemporary society’s attraction to all that is new, innovative and progressive might lead some to believe that a document such as the Creed, which has been basically fixed in its present form for nearly 1,500 years, has no relevance. However, as the expression goes, to judge a book by its cover is not a proper indication of the value of anything or any person. How can the Creed be utilized today? How can its teachings be beneficial to contemporary Catholics?

The answers to these important questions must begin by understanding the countercultural nature of the Creed. Modernity seems to scoff at belief based on faith alone. Thus to profess the teachings of the Creed one must be willing to stand against the contemporary tide of popular opinion. Anyone today who confesses a religious creed runs the risk of being labeled as intellectually inept or simply ignorant of reality. Professing the Creed and its teachings, which contradict the world, requires one to bear witness to a certain understanding of faith. Those who witness to the reality of God and the teachings of the Church may appear foolish in the eyes of the sophisticated. Thus the Creed stands as a relevant document that stands against the secular wave which seeks to envelop the world.

The Creed is also relevant today because it serves as a rule of faith for members of the Church. The Creed guides our understanding of Scripture, for it was developed through an interpretive process of the Bible. Additionally, through its use of philosophical terms, such as homoousios (of one substance), the Creed goes beyond Scripture. It provides the words that explicate the fundamental convictions concerning God, the world and humanity. Thus, as a rule of faith, the Creed provides a norm for Christian understanding.

Besides serving as a rule of faith, the Creed also provides a definition of faith. The document, while not exhausting the meaning of Christian life and practice, provides boundaries for Christian belief and, therefore, the Christian community. It finds a relevance that clearly articulates Christian belief with respect to God and the Church. Yet, many aspects and teachings of the Church are not addressed. Additionally, the Creed describes how God is manifest in the world; it presents the efficacious nature of God’s action. In short, the Creed constructs a Christian worldview that is opposed to contemporary life.

Last, the Creed has important relevance as a guide for Christian practice. While the document does not guide every move, it does establish right belief that is orthodoxy and helps us to recognize right practice — namely, orthopraxy. Following the ancient dictum of the Church, Lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief), the Creed, a prayer placed at the central point of the Mass, clearly demonstrates our belief, guiding us in our daily actions.

The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed is not nor was it intended to be a systematic presentation of the Faith; rather it serves as a functional guide, succinctly displaying the basic teachings of Catholicism. Organized in sections that present teachings on the Trinity — Father, Son and Holy Spirit — and the essential four marks of the Church — one, holy, Catholic and apostolic — the Creed as a countercultural document is relevant today as a rule and definition of faith. Having a deeper appreciation for the teaching and significance of this essential document can help Catholics to live their faith more fully and completely today and in the future.

Father Richard Gribble is a member of the Congregation of Holy Cross and a professor of religious studies at Stonehill College in Easton, Mass. He holds a Ph.D. from The Catholic University of America.

The Nicene Creed

I believe in one God, the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.

God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Comments Off

10 min read

Saints

How does the canonization process work?

Father Richard Gribble

February 18, 2022 7:04 am February 18, 2022

10 min read

11258 views

Comments Off

10 min read

It would not be atypical in contemporary parlance to describe a significant friend or other person we know as a “living saint.” What do we mean when calling one a…

It would not be atypical in contemporary parlance to describe a significant friend or other person we know as a “living saint.”

What do we mean when calling one a “saint” and how that person is so recognized by the Church? Catholicism’s 2,000-year history has seen the process for the proclamation of saints develop significantly. Religious historian and journalist Kenneth Woodward, quoting a popular history of the Vatican in his book “Making Saints: How the Catholic Church Determines Who Becomes a Saint, Who Doesn’t, and Why” (Touchstone), commented on the mysterious nature of the canonization process: “The mystery of Sainthood and the canonization process, with all its spiritual dimensions of divine intercession, relics and miracles, probably is the Church’s greatest enigma outside the Mass itself.”

Canonization in the Early Years

The concept of honoring Christian men and women and developing cults to their memory started as a direct result of the Roman persecutions perpetrated on the early followers of Jesus. Public veneration of many of these martyrs, generally celebrated on the date of their death, was in evidence as early as the second century. While Christians regarded all the baptized as saints, dying for the faith was particularly noteworthy and was awarded with special veneration. Sanctity and martyrdom were virtually indistinguishable in the Christian consciousness. As Jesus died obedient to the Father, so the saints died for and in obedience to Christ.

Cults to individual saints, almost exclusively local in nature, arose. In this era there were generally no inquiries, tribunals or judgments concerning saints; rather the martyrs were denoted as saints by public acclamation. This was a period of popular canonization, when spontaneous reputation for sanctity could lead to sainthood.

The medieval period of Church history saw a significant centralization of the procedures for declaring martyrs and men and women of heroic virtues as saints. Greater control was deemed necessary in order to eliminate local abuses and move toward some universal standards. Centralization of the canonization process led to greater hierarchical control and, consequently, a more formalized process. The basic procedure began when a cult arose from the people. This was based not only on miracles but holiness of life. The greater the authority of the Church official who performed the rights of elevatio and translatio, the more God was glorified and the more the saint was recognized. This was the initial reason why bishops often requested intervention of the pope to formally proclaim one a saint. In turn, papal confirmation accentuated the pope’s authority.

The shift to a more centralized canonization process brought a consequent change in the types of individuals who were canonized. Members of religious orders and royal houses in favor with a particular pope were given priority. Most notably was the obvious diminution of martyrdom as the litmus test for sainthood. Servants of God who combined radical poverty, chastity and obedience, such as Francis of Assisi (canonized only two years after his death), were favored. The learned cleric, such as St. Dominic, canonized in 1234, and Thomas Aquinas, canonized in 1323, was another favored category.

The centralization of the canonization process continued apace throughout the 17th and 18th centuries. During the pontificate of Pope Urban VIII (1623-44) the papacy gained complete control over the declaration of saints. One of Pope Urban’s decrees forbade any form of public veneration, including the publication of books of miracles or revelations attributed to a supposed saint, until the person was beatified or canonized by solemn papal declaration. His one exception was if a cult had existed “from time immemorial” or could be justified on the strength of what the Fathers or saints had written about the individual.

Reforms and Codification

Beginning with the publication of the Code of Canon Law in 1917, the canonization process became codified. Specifically, 143 canons that dealt with beatification and canonization were present in the 1917 code. The aforementioned means to centralize the canonization process was made even more formal through codification. Canonization became known as an act by the Supreme Pontiff to declare in a definitive and solemn way that a Catholic Christian was actually in the glory of heaven, interceding for humanity before God. The two categories of martyrdom and heroic virtue, however, did continue to be the avenues one could traverse to be declared a saint.

The procedures defined by the 1917 Code of Canon Law were utilized until Pope Paul VI modified them in March 1969. In his motu proprio, Sanctitas clarior, the pope simplified the norms for beatification. Instead of repeating the informative process on both episcopal and Roman levels, the pope called for the diocesan bishop to initiate the process once it received approval of the Holy See.

Similarly, there was to be only one process to investigate the Servant of God’s writings, life of virtue or martyrdom and absence of a public cult. The bishop was also allowed to investigate purported miracles once he had received instructions from the Sacred Congregation of Rites on how to proceed. These changes greatly simplified the process.

While the canonization process has seen significant development over time, the work of Pope St. John Paul II (r. 1978-2005) produced not only the most beatified and canonized individuals of any pope in history, but also appropriately was the source of the most recent transformation (streamlining) of the canonization process.

In 1983, a wholly revised and simplified system for the canonization of saints was inaugurated. That year an updated Code of Canon Law was promulgated with only one canon (1403) dealing directly with the process of beatification and canonization. The major change came on Jan. 25, 1983, when Pope St. John Paul issued the apostolic constitution Divinus Perfectionis Magister.

While continuity of purpose was maintained, the pope’s 1983 constitution mandated a thorough reform of the entire canonization process inaugurated by Pope Urban VIII in the 17th century and codified in 1917. The goals of this reform were to make the canonization process simpler, faster, less expensive, more collegial and, ultimately, more productive.

The changes were manifested in two fundamental ways: (1) The entire responsibility for gathering evidence in support of the cause was placed in the hands of the local bishop. Instead of two canonical processes, episcopal and the Roman, there would be one, directed by the local bishop. (2) Divinus Perfectionis Magister abolished the entire series of legal dialectics between the postulator and the Promoter of the Faith. A new group of officials, “the college of relators,” supervised the writing of the historical-critical account of the candidate’s life and virtues. The chief sources of information for those reviewing the Servant of God’s cause would be historical, especially a well-documented critical biography. Additionally, the pope said that an updated process was needed as the bishops had asked for a simpler procedure while maintaining “the soundness of the investigation in matters of such great import.”

Divinus Perfectionis Magister created a paradigm shift in how saints were declared. No longer did the process use a courtroom model for determining a truth concerning the saint’s life, but rather it employed the academic model of research and writing. Replacement of the postulator and Promoter of the Faith with the college of relators was arguably the most significant change, because it transformed the process from a trial to an investigation. The criteria for initiation of a cause were also modified. First, the 50-year waiting period was reduced to five years, although even this could be waived by the pope for pastoral reasons. Additionally, the cause was not to be introduced unless there existed a true and widespread acclamation — namely, spontaneous, genuine and broadly held — among the faithful that one was in heaven either through an active martyrdom or because of living life in a heroic manner over and above the actions of upright men and women.

The Modern Process

Today, as a result of St. John Paul’s changes, the process of canonization proceeds in three phases. It begins with the institution of a diocesan inquiry, which consists of a series of investigations initiated by a competent diocesan bishop who wishes to raise a cause of canonization. This inquiry has as its goal the collection of information concerning the life, heroic virtue, reputation of sanctity or martyrdom of the Servant of God, as well as proof of any possible miracles. Second, after the information has been collected, it is sent to the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, presided over by a cardinal prefect, which conducts a study of the case, concluding with the preparation of the positio. Last, the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints discusses and passes judgment on the merits of the cause leading, with the approval of the pope, to beatification or canonization.

In May 2007, Pope Benedict XVI issued Sanctorum Mater (Instruction for Conducting Diocesan or Eparchial Inquiries in the Causes of Saints), which clarified the rationale for canonization. Heroic virtue, reputation for holiness and martyrdom were the three principle criteria for investigation of a cause.

The document also provides greater clarity on the role and duties of the postulator, stating that he or she should be an expert in theology, canon law and history, as well as understanding the work of the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints.

Historical Significance

The celebration of those recognized as saints is an integral part of the Church’s liturgical life. Throughout the liturgical year, a journey that begins with the season of Advent and moves through Christmas, Lent, Easter and Ordinary (ordinal) Time, canonized saints are celebrated. Depending on several factors, including significance of the saint in Church history and tradition, saints have been assigned a certain day that is celebrated as that individual’s “feast” day. A hierarchy of celebrations, moving from greatest to least, is assigned to each saint. Thus the feast days of saints are celebrated as solemnities, feasts, obligatory memorials or optional memorials. In each case, specified prayers pertinent to the saint’s life and work are used in the celebration of Mass and the daily recitation of the Divine Office. In this way the saints become an almost daily example of the qualities one should seek in being a follower of Jesus Christ.

A popular Christian hymn begins, “For all the saints who from their labors rest, who thee by faith, before the world confess.” The lyrics of this song aptly describe the basic foundation upon which Catholicism has built its tradition of sainthood.

Saints, those men and women who have gone before us, marked by the sign of faith and recognized as martyrs or people of heroic virtue, stand as models for people of faith today. The unraveling of this perceived mysterious process, by examination of its historical development, can bring greater appreciation to those who have been so recognized as saints, validity to the whole process, and greater understanding to the Catholic Church, under which the process is conducted. Solving the puzzle of the canonization process and bringing one to greater appreciation of this procedure benefits people of faith, both now and in the future.

Father Richard Gribble is a member of the Congregation of Holy Cross and a professor of religious studies at Stonehill College. He holds a Ph.D. from The Catholic University of America.

Comments Off

4 min read

Mary

Understanding the Immaculate Conception

Father Richard Gribble

July 16, 2021 1:10 am July 16, 2021

4 min read

7734 views

Comments Off

4 min read

The Church’s teaching on the Blessed Virgin Mary’s Immaculate Conception was defined only after centuries of tense theological debate. It was proclaimed to be dogma — doctrine pertaining to divinely…

The Church’s teaching on the Blessed Virgin Mary’s Immaculate Conception was defined only after centuries of tense theological debate.

It was proclaimed to be dogma — doctrine pertaining to divinely revealed truth, which Catholics are obliged to believe — in 1854. Analyzing the historical roots of this feast aptly demonstrates the dynamic and pragmatic nature of our Church and the development of doctrine.

Historical Development

As with all Church teachings, one must investigate what Scripture says concerning this dogma. But the Bible does not speak of the Immaculate Conception in a direct way. Before the 1854 definition, many had pointed to Luke 1:28, “Hail, full of grace” (RSV), to say that Mary was always filled with grace and thus without sin.

Medieval theology was dominated by conflict regarding Mary’s Immaculate Conception. While the feast had spread in some areas of Western Europe, Rome neither celebrated nor officially recommended it. Since the Vatican did not sanction the feast, many bishops and theologians opposed the doctrine as an “innovation.”

St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Thomas Aquinas were the two main theological opponents of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. In 1140, Bernard famously illustrated the prevailing negative attitude toward concupiscence — for Bernard it was unthinkable that the Holy Spirit had been involved in anything so inherently “evil” as the conception of a child. Thomas Aquinas used the doctrine of universal redemption to argue against the concept of the Immaculate Conception, saying that if Mary had not been stained by original sin then it would detract from Christ’s dignity as the savior of all people.

Nonetheless, the objections of Bernard and Thomas did not win the theological debate. The argument of Bernard concerning concupiscence was rendered useless with a renewed understanding of human sexuality. And Blessed John Duns Scotus, a Franciscan from Oxford University, answered the objections of Aquinas by arguing that Mary’s preservation from original sin did not remove her dependence on Christ’s redemptive work. Rather, more than anyone, Mary needed Christ as her redeemer since she would have contracted original sin if the grace of Christ had not prevented it from happening.

Through the late Renaissance period and moving into the modern era, the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception became more acceptable. The Council of Basel, called in 1431, stated that Mary, by a special gift of grace, had never been subject to original sin. Furthermore, the council declared that such a belief was “pious and agreeable to the worship of the Church, the Catholic faith and the teaching of Holy Scripture.” Later, Pope Sixtus IV, another Franciscan, prescribed the feast for the diocese of Rome in 1477, but did not command it. Pope Clement XI prescribed the feast for the whole Church in 1708, to be celebrated on Dec. 8.

Confirmation in the 19th Century

Many developments regarding the definition of Mary’s Immaculate Conception took place in the 19th century. In 1830, the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to St. Catherine Labouré, revealing to her an image of what is referred to as the “Miraculous Medal.” The medal was forged as a remembrance of this apparition, and contains the words, “O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.” This popular sacramental affirms the sinlessness of Mary and her Immaculate Conception.

In 1846, the U.S. bishops, meeting in Baltimore, unanimously selected the Blessed Virgin Mary, under her title of the Immaculate Conception, as the county’s patroness, which was approved by Pope Pius IX, who defined the dogma less than a decade later.

By his definition of the Immaculate Conception as a divinely revealed reality, Blessed Pius IX opted to do so without the aid of a council of bishops. The process began by asking for comments from bishops, religious orders and interested laity on the possibility of a definition concerning the Immaculate Conception. Despite some exceptions, the general response was favorable, and the Pope pronounced the dogma in 1854 — the first dogma so proclaimed outside an ecumenical council.

Blessed Pius IX’s initiative to define Mary’s perpetual sinlessness was given validity in 1858. That year Mary made a series of apparitions to the young French peasant girl St. Bernadette Soubirous at Lourdes. In the apparitions, Mary identified herself by stating, “I am the Immaculate Conception.” Once more, as with St. Catherine Labouré, Mary’s sinlessness had been verified by the supernatural.

After a lengthy history of development and supernatural support, Catholic doctrine proclaims that Mary was sinless from the time of her conception. This reality of the Faith is celebrated annually on Dec. 8 as the solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.

Father Richard Gribble, C.S.C., is a professor of religious studies at Stonehill College. He holds a Ph.D. from The Catholic University of America.

Comments Off