Catholic Encyclopedia: Beatification and Canonization

Beatification and Canonization

According to some writers the origin of beatification and canonization in the Catholic
Church is to be traced back to the ancient pagan apotheosis.  (See APOTHEOSIS.)  In
his classic work on the subject (<De Servorum Dei Beatificatione et Beatorum
Canonizatione>) Benedict XIV examines and at the very outset refutes this view.  He
shows so well the substantial differences between them that no right-thinking person
need henceforth confound the two institutions or derive one from the other.  It is a
matter of history who were elevated to the honour of apotheosis, on what grounds, and
by whose authority; no less clear is the meaning that was attached to it.  Often the
decree was due to the statement of a single person (possibly bribed or enticed by
promises, and with a view to fix the fraud more securely in the minds of an already
superstitious people) that while the body of the new god was being burned, an eagle, in
the case of the emperors, or a peacock (Juno's sacred bird), in the case of their consorts,
was seen to carry heavenward the spirit of the departed (Livy, Hist. Rome, I, xvi;
Herodian, Hist. Rome, IV, ii, iii). Apotheosis was awarded to most members of the
imperial family, of which family it was the exclusive privilege.  No regard was had to
virtues or remarkable achievements.  Recourse was frequently had to this form of
deification to escape popular hatred by distracting attention from the cruelty of
imperial rulers.  It is said that Romulus was deified by the senators who slew him;
Poppaea owed her apotheosis to her imperial paramour, Nero, after he had kicked her
to death; Geta had the honour from his brother Caracalla, who had got rid of him
through jealousy. Canonization in the Catholic Church is quite another thing.  The
Catholic Church canonizes or beatifies only those whose lives have been marked by the
exercise of heroic virtue, and only after this has been proved by common repute for
sanctity and by conclusive arguments. The chief difference, however, lies in the
meaning of the term <canonization>, the Church seeing in the saints nothing more than
friends and servants of God whose holy lives have made them worthy of His special
love.  She does not pretend to make gods (cf. Eusebius Emisenus, Serm. de S. Rom. M.;
Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XXII, x; Cyrill. Alexandr., Contra Jul., lib. VI; Cyprian, De
Exhortat. martyr.; Conc. Nic., II, act. 3).

         The true origin of canonization and beatification must be sought in the Catholic
doctrine of the worship (<cultus>), invocation, and intercession of the saints.  As was
taught by St. Augustine (Quaest. in Heptateuch., lib. II, n. 94; contra Faustum, lib. XX,
xxi), Catholics, while giving to God alone adoration strictly so-called, honour the saints
because of the Divine supernatural gifts which have earned them eternal life, and
through which they reign with God in the heavenly fatherland as His chosen friends
and faithful servants.  In other words, Catholics honour God in His saints as the loving
distributor of supernatural gifts.  The worship of <latria> (<latreia>), or strict
adoration, is given to God alone; the worship of <dulia> (<douleia>), or honour and
humble reverence, is paid the saints; the worship of <hyperdulia> (<hyperdouleia>), a
higher form of <dulia>, belongs, on account of her greater excellence, to the Blessed
Virgin Mary.  The Church (Aug., Contra Faustum, XX, xxi, 21; cf. De Civit. Dei, XXII, x)
erects her altars to God alone, though in honour and memory of the saints and martyrs.
There is Scriptural warrant for such worship in the passages where we are bidden to
venerate angels (Ex., xxiii, 20 sqq.; Jos., v, 13 sqq.; Dan., viii, 15 sqq.; x, 4 sqq.; Luke, ii, 9
sqq.; Acts, xii, 7 sqq.; Apoc., v, 11 sqq.; vii, 1 sqq.' Matt., xviii, 10; etc.), whom holy men
are not unlike, as sharers of the friendship of God.  And if St. Paul beseeches the
brethren (Rom., xv, 30; II Cor., i, 11; Col., iv, 3; Ephes., vi, 18, 19) to help him by their
prayers for him to God, we must with even greater reason maintain that we can be
helped by the prayers of the saints, and ask their intercession with humility.  If we may
beseech those who still live on earth, why not those who live in heaven?  It is objected
that the invocation of saints is opposed to the unique mediatorship of Christ Jesus.
There is indeed "one mediator of God and man, the man Christ Jesus".  But He is our
mediator in His quality of our common Redeemer; He is not our sole intercessor nor
advocate, nor our sole mediator by way of supplication.  In the eleventh session of the
Council of Chalcedon (451 we find the Fathers exclaiming, "Flavianus lives after death!
May the Martyr pray for us!"  If we accept this doctrine of the worship of the saints, of
which there are innumerable evidences in the writings of the Fathers and the liturgies
of the Eastern and Western Churches, we shall not wonder t the loving care with which
the Church committed to writing the sufferings of the early martyrs, sent these accounts
from one gathering of the faithful to another, and promoted the veneration of the
martyrs. Let one instance suffice.  In the circular epistle of the Church of Smyrna (Eus.,
Hist. Eccl., IV, xxiii) we find mention of the religious celebration of the day on which
St. Polycarp suffered martyrdom (23 February, 155); and the words of the passage
exactly express the main purpose which the Church has in the celebration of such
anniversaries: "We have at last gathered his bones, which are dearer to us than priceless
gems and purer than gold, and laid them to rest where it was befitting they should lie.
And if it be possible for us to assemble again, may God grant us to celebrate the
birthday of his martyrdom with gladness, thus to recall the memory of those who
fought in the glorious combat, and to teach and strengthen by his example, those who
shall come after us."  This anniversary celebration and veneration of the martyrs was a
service of thanksgiving and congratulation, a token and an evidence of the joy of those
who engaged in it (Muratori, de Paradiso, x), and its general diffusion explains why
Tertullian, though asserting with the Chiliasts that the departed just would obtain
eternal glory only after the general resurrection of the body, admitted an exception for
the martyrs (de Resurrectione Carnis, xliii).

It must be obvious, however, that while private moral certainty of their sanctity and
possession of heavenly glory may suffice for private veneration of the saints, it cannot
suffice for public and common acts of that kind.  No member of a social body may,
independently of its authority, perform an act proper to that body.  It follows naturally
that for the public veneration of the saints the ecclesiastical authority of the pastors and
rulers of the Church was constantly required.  The Church had at heart, indeed, the
honour of the martyrs, but she did not therefore grant liturgical honours
indiscriminately to all those who had died for the Faith. St. Optatus of Mileve, writing
at the end of the fourth century, tells us (De Schism, Donat., I, xvi, in P. L., XI, 916-917)
of a certain noble lady, Lucilla, who was reprehended by Caecilianus, Archdeacon of
Carthage, for having kissed before Holy Communion the bones of one who was either
not a martyr or whose right to the title was unproved.  The decision as to the martyr
having died for his faith in Christ, and the consequent permission of worship, lay
originally with the bishop of the place in which he had borne his testimony.  The
bishop inquired into the motive of his death and, finding he had died a martyr, sent his
name with an account of his martyrdom to other churches, especially neighboring ones,
so that, in event of approval by their respective bishops, the cultus of the martyr might
extend to their churches also, and that the faithful, as we read of St. Ignatius in the
"Acts" of his martyrdom (Ruinart, Acta Sincera Martyrum, 19) "might hold communion
with the generous martyr of Christ (<generoso Christi martyri communicarent>).
Martyrs whose cause, so to speak, had been discussed, and the fame of whose
martyrdom had been confirmed, were known as proved (<vindicati>) martyrs.  As far
as the word is concerned it may probably not antedate the fourth century, when it was
introduced in the Church at Carthage; but the fact is certainly older.  In the earlier ages,
therefore, this worship of the saints was entirely local and passed from one church to
another with the permission of their bishops. This is clear from the fact that in none of
the ancient Christian cemeteries are there found paintings of martyrs other than those
who had suffered in that neighborhood.  It explains, also, almost the universal
veneration very quickly paid to some martyrs, e.g., St. Lawrence, St. Cyprian of
Carthage, Pope St. Sixtus of Rome [Duchesne, Origines du culte chretien (Paris, 1903),
284].

         The worship of confessors--of those, that is, who died peacefully after a life of
heroic virtue--is not as ancient as that of the martyrs. The word itself takes on a
different meaning after the early Christian periods. In the beginning it was given to
those who confessed Christ when examined in the presence of enemies of the Faith
(Baronius, in his notes to Ro. Mart., 1 January, D), or, as Benedict XIV explains (op, cit.,
II, c. ii, n. 6), to those who died peacefully after having confessed the Faith before
tyrants or other enemies of the Christian religion, and undergone tortures or suffered
other punishments of whatever nature.  Later on, confessors were those who had lived
a holy life and closed it by a holy death in Christian peace.  It is in this sense that we
now treat of the worship paid to confessors.

         It was in the fourth century, as is commonly held, that confessors were first given
public ecclesiastical honour, though occasionally praised in ardent terms by earlier
Fathers, and although an abundant rewards (<multiplex corona>) is declared by St.
Cyprian to be theirs (De Zelo et Livore, col. 509; cf. Innoc. III, De Myst. Miss., III, x;
Benedict XIV, op. cit., I, v, no  3 sqq; Bellarmine, De Missa, II, xx, no 5).  Still Bellarmine
thinks it uncertain when confessors began to be objects of cultus, and asserts that it was
not before 800, when the feasts of Sts. Martin and Remigius are found in the catalogue
of feasts drawn up by the Council of Mainz.  This opinion of Innocent III and Benedict
XIV is confirmed by the implicit approval of St. Gregory the Great (Dial., I, xiv, and III,
xv) and by well attested facts; in the East, for example, Hilarion (Sozomen, III, xiv, and
VIII, xix), Ephrem (Greg. Nyss., Orat. in laud. S. Ephrem), and other confessors were
publicly honoured in the fourth century; and, in the West, St. Martin of Tours, as is
gathered plainly from the oldest Breviaries and the Mozarabic Missal (Bona, Rer. Lit.,
II, xii, no. 3), and St. Hilary of Poitiers, as can be shown from the very ancient Mass-
book known as "Missale Francorum", were objects of a like cultus in the same century
(Martigny, Dictionnaire des antiquites chretiennes, s. v. Confesseurs).  The reason  of
this veneration lies, doubtless, in the resemblance of the confessors' self-denying and
heroically virtuous lives to the sufferings of the martyrs; such lives could truly be called
prolonged martyrdoms.  Naturally, therefore, such honour was first paid to ascetics
(Duchesne, op. cit., 284) and only afterwards to those who resembled in their lives the
very penitential and extraordinary existence of the ascetics.  So true is this that the
confessors themselves are frequently called martyrs.  St. Gregory Nazianzen calls St.
Basil a martyr (Orat. de laud., P. L., XXXVI, 602); St. Chrysostom applies the same title
to Eustachius of Antioch (Opp. II, 606); St. Paulinus of Nola writes of St. Felix of Nola
that he won heavenly honours, <sine sanguine martyr> ("a bloodless martyr"-Poem.,
XIV, Carm. III, v, 4); St. Gregory the Great styles Zeno of Verona a martyr (Dial. III.
xix), and Metronius gives to St. Roterius (Acta SS., II, May 11, 306) the same title.  Later
on, the names of confessors were inserted in the diptychs, and due reverence was paid
them. Their tombs were honoured (Martigny, loc. cit.) with the same title (<martyria>)
as those of the martyrs.  It remained true, however, at all times that it was unlawful to
venerate confessors without permission of the ecclesiastical authority as it had been so
to venerate martyrs (Bened. XIV, loc. cit., vi).

We have seen that for several centuries the bishops, in some places only the primates
and patriarchs (August., Brevic. Collat. cum Donatistis, III, xiii, no 25 in P. L., XLIII,
628), could grant to martyrs and confessors public ecclesiastical honour; such honour,
however, was always decreed only for the local territory over which the grantors held
jurisdiction.  Still, it was only the Bishop of Rome's acceptance of the cultus that made it
universal, since he alone could permit or command in the Universal Church [Gonzalez
Tellez, Comm. Perpet. in singulos textus libr. Decr. (III, xlv), in cap. i, De reliquiis et
vener. Sanct.].  Abuses, however, crept into this form of discipline, due as well to
indiscretions of popular fervour as to the carelessness of some bishops in inquiring into
the lives of those whom they permitted to be honoured as saints.  Towards the close of
the eleventh century the popes found it necessary to restrict episcopal authority on this
point, and decreed that the virtues and miracles of persons proposed for public
veneration should be examined in councils, more particularly in general councils.
Urban II, Calixtus II, and Eugenius III followed this line of action.  It happened, even
after these decrees, that "some, following the ways of the pagans and deceived by the
fraud of the evil one, venerated as a saint a man who had been killed while
intoxicated".  Alexander III (1159-81) took occasion to prohibit his veneration in these
words : "For the future you will not presume to pay him reverence, as, even though
miracles were worked through him, it would not allow you to revere him as a saint
unless with the authority of the Roman Church" (c. i, tit. cit., X. III, xlv).  Theologians do
not agree as to the full import of this decretal.  Either a new law was made (Bellarmine,
De Eccles. Triumph., I, viii), in which case the pope then for the first time reserved the
right of beatification, or a pre-existing law was confirmed. As the decretal did not put
an end to all controversy, and some bishops did not obey it in as far as it regarded
beatification (which right they had certainly possessed hitherto), Urban VII published,
in 1634, a Bull which put an end to all discussion by reserving to the Holy See
exclusively not only its immemorial right of canonization, but also that of beatification.

NATURE OF BEATIFICATION AND CANONIZATION

Before dealing with the actual procedure in causes of beatification and canonization, it
is proper to define these terms precisely and briefly in view of the preceding
considerations.  Canonization, generally speaking, is a decree regarding the public
ecclesiastical veneration of an individual. Such veneration, however, may be permissive
or preceptive, may be universal or local.  If the decree contains a precept, and is
universal in the sense that it binds the whole Church, it is a decree of canonization; if it
only permits such worship, or if it binds under precept, but not with regard to the
whole Church, it is a decree of beatification.  In the ancient discipline of the Church,
probably even as late as Alexander III, bishops could in their several dioceses allow
public veneration to be paid to saints, and such episcopal decrees were not merely
permissive, but, in my opinion, preceptive.  Such decrees, however, could not prescribe
universal honour; the effect of an episcopal act of this kind, was equivalent to our
modern beatification.  In such cases there was, properly speaking, no canonization,
unless with the consent of the pope extending the cultus in question, implicitly or
explicitly, and imposing it by way of precept upon the Church at large.  In the more
recent discipline beautification is a permission to venerate, granted by the Roman
Pontiffs with restriction to certain places and to certain liturgical exercises.  Thus it is
unlawful to pay to the person known as Blessed (i. e. the <Beatus>, Beatified), public
reverence outside of the place for which the permission is granted, or to recite an office
in his honour, or to celebrate Mass with prayers referring to him, unless special indult
be had; similarly, other methods of honour have been interdicted.  Canonization is a
precept of the Roman Pontiff commanding public veneration to be paid an individual
by the Universal Church.  To sum up, beatification, in the present discipline, differs
from canonization in this: that the former implies (1) a locally restricted, not a
universal, permission to venerate, which is (2) a mere permission, and no precept;
while canonization implies a universal precept.  In exceptional cases one or other
element of this distinction may be lacking; thus, Alexander III not only allowed but
ordered the public cultus of Bl. William of Malavalle in the Diocese of Grosseto, and his
action was confirmed by Innocent III; Leo X acted similarly with regard to Bl. Hosanna
for the city and district of Mantua; Clement IX with regard to Bl. Rose of Lima, when he
selected her as principal patron of Lima and of Peru; and Clement X, by making her
patron of all America, the Philippines, and the Indies.  Clement X also chose Bl.
Stanislaus Kostka as patron of Poland, Lithuania, and the allied provinces.  Again, in
respect to universality, Sixtus IV permitted the cultus of Bl. John Boni for the Universal
Church.  In all these instances there was only beatification.  The cultus of Bl. Rose of
Lima, it is true, was general and obligatory for America, but, lacking complete
preceptive universality, was not strictly speaking canonization (Benedict XIV, op. sit., I,
xxxix).

         Canonization, therefore, creates a cultus which is universal and obligatory.  But in
imposing this obligation the pope may, and does, use one of two methods, each
constituting a new species of canonization, i. e. formal canonization and equivalent
canonization.  Formal canonization occurs when the cultus is prescribed as an explicit
and definitive decision, after due judicial process and the ceremonies usual in such
cases.  Equivalent canonization occurs when the pope, omitting the judicial process and
the ceremonies, orders some servant of God to be venerated in the Universal Church;
this happens when such a saint has been from a remote period the object of veneration,
when his heroic virtues (or martyrdom) and miracles are related by reliable historians,
and the fame of his miraculous intercession is uninterrupted.  Many examples of such
canonization are to be found in Benedict XIV; e. g. Saints Romuald, Norbert, Bruno,
Peter Nolasco, Raymond Nonnatus, John of Matha, Felix of Valois, Queen Margaret of
Scotland, King Stephen of Hungary, Wenceslaus Duke of Bohemia, and Gregory VII.
Such instances afford a good proof of the caution with which the Roman Church
proceeds in these equivalent canonizations.  St. Romuald was not canonized until 439
years after his death, and the honour came to him sooner than to any of the others
mentioned.  We may add that this equivalent canonization consists usually in the
ordering of an Office and Mass by the pope in honour of the saint, and that mere
enrolment in the Roman Martyrology does not by any means imply this honour (Bened.
XIV, l, c., xliii, no 14).

PAPAL INFALLIBILITY AND CANONIZATION

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,
Banez, Vasquez, and, among the canonists, of Gonzales Tellez, Fagnanus,
Schmalzgruber, Barbosa, Reiffenstul, Covarruvias (Variar. resol., I, x, no 13), Albitius
(De Inconstantia in fide, xi, no 205), Petra (Comm. in Const. Apost., I, in notes to Const.
I, Alex., III, no 17 sqq.), Joannes a S. Thoma (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 [<qua
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 Suarez (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.

         What is the object of this infallible judgment of the pope?  Does he define that the
person canonized is in heaven or only that he has practiced Christian virtues in an
heroic degree?  I have never seen this question discussed; my own opinion is that
nothing else is defined than that the person canonized is in heaven.  The formula used
in the act of canonization has nothing more than this: "In honour of . . . we decree and
define that Blessed N. is a Saint, and we inscribe his name in the catalogue of saints,
and order that his memory by devoutly and piously celebrated yearly on the . . . day of
. . his feast." (Ad honorem . . . beatum N. Sanctum esse decernimus et definimus ac
sanctorum catalogo adscribimus statuentes ab ecclesia universali illius memoriam
quolibet anno, die ejus natali . . . pia devotione recoli debere.)  There is no question of
heroic virtue in this formula; on the other hand, sanctity does not necessarily imply the
exercise of heroic virtue, since one who had not hitherto practised heroic virtue would,
by the one transient heroic act in which he yielded up his life for Christ, have justly
deserved to be considered a saint.  This view seems all the more certain if we reflect
that all the arguments of theologians for papal infallibility in the canonization of saints
are based on the fact that on such occasions the popes believe and assert that the
decision which they publish is infallible (Pesch, Prael. Dogm., I, 552).

         This general agreement of theologians as to papal infallibility in canonization
must not be extended to beatification, not withstanding the contrary teaching of the
canonical commentary known as "Glossa" [in cap. un. de reliquiis et venerat. SS. (III, 22)
in 6; Innocent., Comm. in quinque Decretalium libros, tit. de reliquiis, etc., no 4;
Ostiensis in eumd. tit. no 10; Felini, cap. lii, De testibus, etc., X (II, 20); Caietani, tract.
De indulgentiis adversus Lutherum ad Julium Mediceum; Augustini de Ancona, seu
Triumphi, De potestate eccl., Q. xiv, a. 4). Canonists and theologians generally deny the
infallible character of decrees of beatification, whether formal or equivalent, since it is
always a permission, not a command; while it leads to canonization, it is not the last
step.  Moreover, in most cases, the cultus permitted by beatification, is restricted to a
determined province, city, or religious body (Benedict XIV, op. cit., I, xlii).  Some,
however, have thought otherwise (Arriaga, Theol., V, disp. 7, p. 6; Amicus, Theol., IV,
disp. 7, p.4, no 98; Turrian= us on II-II, V, disp. 17, no 6; Del Bene, De S. Inquisit. II,
dub. 254).

PRESENT PROCEDURE IN CAUSES OF BEATIFICATION AND CANONIZATION

We must first distinguish causes of martyrs from those of confessors or virgins, since
the method followed is not entirely identical in both cases.

(a) The beatification of Confessors

In order to secure beatification (the most important and difficult step in the process of
canonization) the regular procedure is as follows:

(1) Choosing of a vice-postulator by the postulator-general of the cause, to promote all
the judicial inquiries necessary in places outside of Rome.  Such inquiries are instituted
by the local episcopal authority.

(2) The preparation of the inquiries (<processus>) all of which are carried on by the
ordinary episcopal authority.  They are of three kinds: <ul> <Informative> inquiries
regard the reputation for sanctity and miracles of the servants of God, not only in
general, but also in particular instances; there may be several such inquiries if the
witnesses to be examined belong to different dioceses.   Processes <de non cultu> are
instituted to prove that the decrees of Urban VIII regarding the prohibition of public
worship of servants of God before their beatification have been obeyed; they are
generally conducted by the bishop of the place where the relics of the servant of God
are preserved.   Other inquiries are known as <Processiculi diligentiarum> and have
for their object the writings attributed to the person whose beatification is in question;
they vary in number according to the dioceses where such writings are found, or are
thought likely to be found, and may not be judicially executed before an "Instruction" is
obtained from the promotor of the Faith by the postulator-general and by him sent to
the bishop in question.

(3) The results of all these inquiries are sent to Rome, to the Congregation of Rites, in
charge of a messenger (<portitor>) chosen by the judges, or by some other secure way,
in case a rescript of the congregation dispenses from the obligation of sending a
messenger.

(4) They are opened, translated if necessary into Italian, a public copy is made, and a
cardinal is deputed by the pope as <relator> or <ponens> of the cause, for all which
steps rescripts of the congregation, confirmed by the pope, must be obtained.

(5) The writings of the servant of God are next revised by theologians appointed by the
cardinal relator himself, authorized to so act by a special rescript.  Meantime, the
advocate and the procurator of the cause, chosen by the postulator-general, have
prepared all the documents that concern the introduction of the cause (<positio super
introductione causae>).  These consist of (a) a summary of the informative processes,
(b) an information, (c) answers to the observations or difficulties of the promotor of the
Faith sent by him to the Postulator.

(6) This collection of documents (<positio>) is printed and distributed to the cardinals
of the Congregation of Rites forty days before the date assigned for their discussion.

(7) If nothing contrary to faith and morals is found in the writings of the servant of
God, a decree is published, authorizing further action (<quod in causa procedi possit
ad ulteriora>), i. e., the discussion of the matter (<dubium>) of appointment or non-
appointment of a commission for the introduction of the cause.

(8) At the time fixed by the Congregation of Rites an ordinary meeting (<congregatio>)
is held in which this appointment is debated by the cardinals of the aforesaid
congregation and its officials, but without the vote or participation of the consultors,
though this privilege is always granted them by prescript.

(9) If in this meeting the cardinals favour the appointment of the aforesaid commission,
a decree to that effect is promulgated, and the pope signs it, but, according to custom,
with his baptismal name, not with that of his pontificate.  Thenceforward the servant of
God is judicially given the title of Venerable.

(10) A petition is then presented asking remissorial letters for the bishops <in partibus>
(outside of Rome), authorizing them to set on foot by Apostolic authority, the inquiry
(<processus>) with regard to the fame of sanctity and miracles in general.  This
permission is granted by rescript, and such remissorial letters are prepared and sent to
the bishops by the postulator-general.  In case the eye-witnesses be of advanced age,
other remissorial letters are usually granted for the purpose of opening a process
known as "inchoative" concerning the particular virtues of miracles of the person in
question.  This is done in order that the proofs may not be lost (<ne pereant
probationes>), and such inchoative process precedes that upon the miracles and virtues
in general.

(11) While the Apostolic process concerning the reputation of sanctity is under way
outside of Rome, documents are being prepared by the procurator of the cause for the
discussion <de non cultu>, or absence of cultus, and at the appointed time an ordinary
meeting (<congregatio>) is held in which the matter is investigated; if it be found that
the decree of Urban VIII has been complied with, another decree provides that further
steps may be taken.

(12) When the inquiry concerning the reputation of sanctity (<super fama>) has arrived
in Rome, it is opened (as already described in speaking of the ordinary processes, and
with the same formalities in regard to rescripts), then translated into Italian,
summarized, and declared valid. The documents <super fama in general are prepared
by the advocate, and at the proper time, in an ordinary meeting of the cardinals of the
Congregation of Rites, the question is discussed: whether there is evidence of a general
repute for sanctity and miracles of this servant of God.  If the answer is favourable, a
decree embodying this result is published.

(13) New remissorial letters are then sent to the bishops <in partibus> for Apostolical
processes with regard to the reputation for sanctity and miracles in particular.  These
processes must be finished within eighteen months and when they are received in
Rome are opened, as above described, and by virtue of an equal number of rescripts, by
the cardinal prefect, translated into Italian, and their summary authenticated by the
Chancellor of the Congregation of Rites.

(14) The advocate of the cause next prepares the documents (<positio>) which have
reference to the discussion of the validity of all the preceding processes, informative
and Apostolic.

(15) This discussion is held in the meeting called congregatio rotalis  from the fact that
it is only judges of the Rota who vote.  If the difficulties of the promotor of the Faith are
satisfactorily answered, the decree establishing the validity of the inquiries or processes
is published.

(16) Meanwhile all necessary preparation is made for the discussion of the question
(<dubium>): Is there evidence that the venerable servant of God practiced virtues both
theological and cardinal, and in an heroic degree?  (<An constet de virtutibus Ven.
servi Dei, tam theologicis quam cardinalibus, in heroico gradu?>)  In the causes of
confessors this step is of primary importance.  The point is discussed in three meetings
or congregations called respectively, ante-preparatory, preparatory, and general.  The
first of these meetings is held in the palace of the cardinal relator (<reporter>) of the
cause, and in it only consultors of the Congregation of Sacred Rites, and with their
chairman, or prefect, presiding, the third is also held in the Vatican, and at it the pope
presides, and both cardinals and consultors vote.  For each of these congregations the
advocate of the cause prepares and prints official reports (<positiones>), called
respectively <report>, <new report>, <final report>, concerning the virtues, etc.,--
<positio, positio nova, positio novissima, super virtutibus>.  In each case, before
proceeding to the subsequent meeting, a majority of the consultors must decide that the
difficulties of the promotor of the Faith have been satisfactorily solved.

(17) When the Congregation of Rites in the above described general meeting has
decided favourably, the pope is asked is asked to sign the solemn decree which asserts
that there exists evidence of the heroic virtues of the servant of God.  This decree is not
published until after the pope, having commended the matter to God in prayer, gives a
final consent and confirms by his supreme sentence the decision of the congregation.

(18) The miracles now remain to be proved, of which two of the first class are required
in case the practice of virtues in the heroic degree has been proved, in both ordinary
and Apostolic inquiries or processes by eyewitnesses--three, if the eyewitnesses were
found only in the ordinary processes; four, if the virtues were proven only by hearsay
(<de auditu>) witnesses.  If the miracles have been sufficiently proven in the Apostolic
processes (<super virtutibus>) already declared valid, steps are taken at once to
prepare the documents with regard to miracles (<super miraculis>).  If in the Apostolic
processes only general mention has been made of the miracles, new Apostolic processes
must be opened, and conducted after the manner already described for proving the
practice of virtues in an heroic degree.

(19) The discussion of the particular miracles proceeds in exactly the same way and in
the same order as that of the virtues.  If the decisions be favourable, the general
meeting of the congregation is followed by a decree, confirmed by the pope, in which it
is announced that there is proof of miracles.  It must be noted here that in the <positio>
for the ante-preparatory congregation there are required, and are printed, opinions of
two physicians, one of whom has been chosen by the postulator, the other by the
Congregation of Rites.  Of the three reports (<positiones>) above mentioned, and which
are now also required, the first is prepared in the usual way; the second consists of an
exposition of the heroic virtues of the servant of God. an information, and a reply to
later observations of the promotor of the Faith; the last consists only of an answer to his
final observations.

(20) When the miracles have been proved, another meeting of the Congregation of Rites
is held in which it is debated once, and only once, whether or not, given the
approbation of the virtues and miracles, it is safe to proceed with the solemnities of
beatification.  If a majority of the consultors be favourable, a decree to this effect is
issued by the pope, and at the time appointed by him the solemn beatification of the
servant of God takes place in the Vatican Basilica, on which occasion a pontifical Brief
is issued permitting the public cultus and veneration of the beatified person now
known as Blessed (<Beatus>).

(b) The Beatification of Martyrs

(1) The causes of martyrs are conducted in the same way as those of confessors as far as
the informative processes and those <de non cultu> and <ad introductionem causae>
are concerned.  But when once the commission of introduction has been appointed they
advance much more rapidly.

(2) No remissorial letters are granted for Apostolic processes concerning the general
reputation for martyrdom and miracles; the letters sent call for an immediate
investigation into the fact of martyrdom, its motive, and the particular miracles alleged.
There is no longer a discussion of the general reputation for martyrdom or miracles.

(3) The miracles are not discussed, as formerly, in separate meetings, but in the same
meetings that deal with the fact and the motive of the martyrdom.

(4) The miracles (<signa>) required are not those of the first class; those of the second
class suffice, nor is their number determined.  On some occasions the decision as to
miracles has been entirely dispensed with.

(5) The discussion as to martyrdoms and miracles, formerly held in three meetings or
congregations, viz. the ante-preparatory, preparatory, and general, is now usually
conducted, through a dispensation to be had in each instance from the sovereign
pontiff, in a single congregation known as <particularis>, or special.  It consists of six or
seven cardinals of the Congregation of Rites and four or five prelates especially
deputed by the pope.  There is but one positio prepared in the usual way; if there be an
affirmative majority a decree is issued concerning the proof of martyrdom, the cause of
martyrdom, and miracles.  (<Constare de Martyrio, causa Martyrii et signis>.)

(6) The final stage is a discussion of the security (<super tuto>) with which advance to
beatification may be made, as in the case of confessors; the solemn beatification then
follows.  This procedure is followed in all cases of formal beatification in causes of both
confessors and martyrs proposed in the ordinary way (<per viam non cultus>).  Those
proposed as coming under the definition of cases excepted (<casus excepti>) by Urban
VIII are treated in another way.  In such cases it must be proved that an immemorial
public veneration (at least for 100 years before the promulgation, in 1640, of the decrees
of Urban VIII) has been paid the servant of God, whether confessor or martyr.  Such
cause is proposed under the title of "confirmation of veneration" (<de confirmatione
cultus>); it is dealt with in an ordinary meeting of the Congregation of Rites.  When the
difficulties of the promotor of the Faith have been satisfied, a pontifical decree
confirming the cultus is promulgated.  Beatification of this kind is called equivalent or
virtual.

(c) The Canonization of Confessors or Martyrs

The canonization of confessors or martyrs may be taken up as soon as two miracles are
reported to have been worked at their intercession, after the pontifical permission of
public veneration as described above.  At this stage it is only required that the two
miracles worked after the permission awarding a public cultus be discussed in three
meetings of the congregation.  The discussion proceeds in the ordinary way; if the
miracles be confirmed another meeting (<super tuto>) is held.  The pope then issues a
Bull of Canonization in which he not only permits, but commands, the public cultus, or
veneration, of the saint.

It is with the utmost possible brevity that I have described the elements of a process of
beatification or canonization.  It may be easily conjectured that considerable time must
elapse before any cause of beatification or canonization can be conducted, from the first
steps of the information, inquiry, or process, to the issuing of the decree <super tuto>.
According to the constitution of this Congregation, more than one important discussion
(<dubia majora>) cannot be proposed at the same time.  It must be remembered <ul>
that the same cardinals and consultors must vote in all discussions;  that there is but
one promotor of the Faith and one sub-promotor, who alone have charge of all
observations to be made with regard to the dubia;  that these cardinals and consultors
have to treat questions of ritual as well as processes of canonization and
beatification.</ul> To execute all this business there is but one weekly meeting
(<congressus>), a kind of minor congregation in which only the cardinal prefect and
the major officials vote; in it less important and practical questions are settled regarding
rites as well as causes, and answers are given, and rescripts which the pope afterwards
verbally approves.  The other meetings of the congregation (ordinary, rotal, and "upon
virtues and miracles") may be as few as sixteen in the course of the year.  Some other
cause must therefore be found for the slow progress of causes of beatification or
canonization than a lack of good will or activity on the part of the Congregation of
Rites.

EXPENSES

It will not be out of place to give succinctly the ordinary actual expenses of
canonization and beatification. Of these expenses some are necessary others merely
discretionary, e. g. the expenses incurred in obtaining the different rescripts) others,
though necessary, are not specified.  Such are the expenses of the solemnity in the
Vatican Basilica, and for paintings representing the newly beatified which are
afterwards presented to the pope, the cardinals, officials, and consultors of the
Congregation of Rites.  The limits of this class of expenses depend on the postulator of
the cause.  If he chooses to spend a moderate sum the entire cause from the first process
to the solemn beatification will not cost him less than $20,000.  The expenses of the
process from beatification to canonization will easily exceed $30,000.  In illustration of
this we subjoin the final account of the expenses of the public solemnities in the Vatican
Basilica for the canonization by Leo XIII, of Saints Anthony Maria Zaccaria and Peter
Fourier, as published by the Most Rev. Diomede Panici, titular Archbishop of Laodicea,
then Secretary of the Congregation of Rites.

To decoration of the Basilica, lights, architectural designs, labour, and superintendence
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <Lire> 152,840.58

Procession, Pontifical Mass, preparation of altars in Basilica. . . . . . . . . . . .           8,114.58

Cost of gifts presented to Holy Father . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .            1,438.87

Hangings, Sacred Vestments, etc, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       12,990.60

Recompense for services and money loaned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          3,525.07

To the Vatican Chapter as perquisites for decorations and candles . . . . . . . . .
18,000.00

Propine and Competenza . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   16,936.00

Incidental and unforeseen expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .            4,468,40

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .             <Lire>    221,849.10 --or (taking the
<lira> equivalent to $.193 in 1913 United States money) $42,816.87.  (See also
BLESSED.)

CAMILLUS BECCARI

Transcribed by Janet Grayson

Taken from the New Advent Web Page (www.knight.org/advent).

This article is part of the Catholic Encyclopedia Project, an effort aimed at placing the
entire Catholic Encyclopedia on the World Wide Web. The coordinator is Kevin Knight,
editor of the New Advent Catholic Website. If you would like to contribute to this
worthwhile project, you can contact him by e-mail at ([email protected]). For
more information please download the file cathen.txt/.zip.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


Provided courtesy of:
Eternal Word Television Network
5817 Old Leeds Road
Irondale, AL 35210
www.ewtn.com

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.ratthing.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.