(Rome / San Salvardor) Curial Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia could not wait. Compared to some of the media he was unofficially making known the date for the beatification of Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero before an official announcement was made by the Holy See. The beatification of the Archbishop of San Salvador, murdered in 1980, will be held in the capital of the Central American country this coming 23th of May.
Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia of the Community of Sant'Egidio , since 2012 President of the Pontifical Council on Family, since 1996, postulator for the beatification process and thus, has been concerned almost 20 years with the Causa. After the procedure came to a halt under Pope Benedict XVI., while Pope Francis indicated immediately after his election, he wanted to raise Salvadoran Archbishop to the altars.
Martyrdom Recognized
Early January the Theological Commission of the Congregation of Saints recognized the assassination of the Archbishop on 24 March 1980 in the Church as martyrdom in odium fidei. Pope Francis confirmed the decision on 3 February, paving the way for the beatification.
Paglia is currently staying as special envoy of the Pope in El Salvador and will also meet with President Sanchez Ceren. The journey is preparing for the solemn beatification.
Pope Francis comes to El Salvador?
So far as known, Cardinal Angelo Amato, Prefect of the Congregation for the Saints and Beatification Process will preside on behalf of the Pope over the ceremony for the beatification.
Postulator Paglia announced today at a press conference after visiting the grave of Archbishop Romero in the Cathedral of San Salvador. In El Salvador, they cherished the hope that Pope Francis would personally come to San Salvador and celebrate the beatification.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
image: InfoVaticana
image: InfoVaticana
Trans: Tancred verkon99@hotmail.com
AMDG
24 comments:
Let's not forget the religious sisters, Jesuit priests and lay women who, also, were--in hatred of the faith-- martyred in Latin America during that terrible time. They remain an inspiration and a lesson for us all.
What faith? Dialectical materialism?
I am accept your question, "What faith," as asked sincerely and am responding in kind.
See the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 25, verses 31-46 for a rather comprehensive and pertinent summary of the "Great Judgment"--the Faith as taught by our Incarnate Lord. A favorite verse in this passage is, "'Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it for me.'"
Spare me the usual emotional appeals with irrelevant scripture citations.
Romero allowed dissident clergy to promote Marxist initiatives, and promoted an "land reform" which had nothing to do with justice, it was thievery pure and simple.
Thank you. With your guidance, I witnessed something truly remarkable today about the enduring impact of the late Archbishop Romero, his late clergy and--perhaps, most stunning of all--"irrelevant" Scripture. Am I correct in suspecting that you reject the Church's decision to raise Archbishop Oscar Romero to the ranks of the Blessed?
Why not address what he wrote instead jumping straight to “whatever the Church does is heroically prudent and infallible” route?
Amos,
Why not address the fact that the Pope and the Congregation for the Saints have decided it is morally certain that Oscar Romero was a martyr for the Faith and, in doing so, confirm the faith of a very large number of Catholics in El Salvador and around the world.
That fact is the starting point. Anything else is personal opinion or whatever else might be whirling around in people's psyches.
Gabriel.
Perhaps it is "land reform" that Amos is criticizing as "jumping straight to heroically prudent and infallible" and not raising Archbishop Romero to Blessed. Or perhaps both. If the former then Tancred's characterization of land reform In El Salvador as "thievery pure and simple" is key.
The pertinent fact regarding "thievery" is that in the 1880s the oligarchy consisting, of the "Fourteen Families" (actually there were some additional families, I think) and the military, confiscated virtually all tand arable land held in common by the
local native populations and converted it to the production of coffee--later to include cattle, cotton etc. for export. Most everything that happened between then and the mid 1970s were various disputes over wealth and power between the land owners and the military. Everyone else were virtual peasant
serfs.
The land reform called "thievery" was the vast but impoverished populations effort to restore what had been taken from them generations before. In a legal sense this was certainly theft because decades earlier the military and "Fourteen Families" had written the law that redefined the legal titles to the land. How promoting such "land reform" of the 1970s and 80s could be called unjust, however, is a monumental moral/ethical
innovation--at best. To an outsider such as me, it looks like simple restoration of stolen property--with a remarkably generous system of compensation to the descendants of the original thieves.
To say that this useful idiot was a Saint stretches credulity.
I get it anonymous, thanks for the Marxist spin on Salvadoran history.
Most land owners in El Salvador c. 1980 before land thievery took place were hardly wealthy, but when their land was stolen from them, El Salvador became a food importer, but it doesn't matter to Leftists that their schemes are ultimately harmful not only to the people they demonize, but the people they pretend to help.
In fact, public records show that El Salvador has needed to import basic foodstuffs since the 1880s when nearly all fertile land was aggregated and converted to export/cash crops of coffee, cotton, sugar etc. In the land redistribution of the 1980s, only the largest 18% of the nation's land holdings, owned by 469 individuals were, effected. These large land owners retained at least 100 acres each and were compensated for the
rest over several years. 500,000 acres of land was then distributed to 35,000 families benefitting approximately 200,000 individuals. A perfect solution, of course not... but a start.
By the way, approximately 10,000 peasants were killed by government-backed "death squads" in 1980 alone... and, of course, the late Archbishop Romero.
"To say that this useful idiot was a Saint stretches credulity'
To call Romero a 'useful idiot' is your personal assessment. Christ and Paul the Apostle were called things similar to this.
That is his 'a Saint' clearly is the determination of the Pope, the Congregation for the Saints; and the popular acclaim (a ancient custom) of probably most Salvadorans.
Any other assessment is impossible, considering that he permitted active Marxist dissidents to function in his diocese without disciplining them, among other things, like promoting land reform.
How is this not a canonization meant to sanctify a political point of view which is incompatible with Catholicism?
Any other assessment is impossible to you, Tancred. That's what you are saying.
Furthermore, you are making the ambit, unsubstantiated allegations against Romero which is clearly not share with the Pope and the Congregation and their collective understanding of what is and what is not 'Catholicism.' So to is the rhetorical question about the beatification of Romero being a political act.
I think you have answered the question of Anonymous 4:12 pm
Whoops, I apologize but in reading over my comment above I think I mis-remembered one of the facts. Large land holders were allowed to retain 250 acres after the 1980s land reform NOT 100 acres. Being no fools, they tended to retain the most productive land along with the land with buildings and processing facilities.
Except you're wrong. El Salvador hasn't had a surplus in food production since the 80s.
My opinion happens to be supported by senior clergy who actually knew Romero who weren't happy about his celebrity.
I'm not sure why they aren't more widely heard, but I guess it has to do with the effort to valorize the politics of class warfare and inefficient Marxist economic structures.
You must not be a farmer. 250 acres isn't a lot of land.
You are absolutely correct--I am not a farmer. I wouldn't know one end of a cow from the other.
I do know that in 1900 the average US farm was 150 acres, 200 acres in 1950, 400 acres in 1970 and is now 450 acres. This change is primarily due to the growth of corporate farms.
Coffee--El Salvador's primary agricultural product, representing well over 30% of total--Is typically grown on much, much smaller farms everywhere. For instance, the average coffee farm in Hawaii is only 5 acres and produces, on average, about 10,000 pounds per acre per harvest. Don't know how that production compares to other coffee regions around the world.
Tancred,
Last night when you wrote that El Salvador hasn't had surplus food production since the 80s, you are correct--but I suspect you mean the 1980s when some land reform began. The fact is that it was in the 1880s when the land was re-titled by the government from the local populations to the "Fourteen Families" that crops were converted from corn, beans etc. for local consumption to coffee, sugar etc. for cash export. Coffee and sugar may be necessities of life, heaven knows, but they make for a
rather restricted daily diet.
You do realize that the current canonization process can declare someone a Saint with the most minimal qualifications? Meaning that the only infallible affirmation is that the person is in heaven.
We have already seen canonizations and even beatifications can happen with little to no cult like with John XXIII and Paul VI (even worse).
We have already seen canonization of people whose actions go directly against the faith itself (e.g. facilitating people to break the first commandment on scared Church grounds at Assisi, etc.).
The canonization process is simply a political tool, regardless of a cult or not and regardless of the actions of the person they are trying to canonize.
Correction for myself: It's not merely a political tool, but it can be used like that in several cases after 1983 changes.
Que?
It's certainly more than the average farm in Ireland!
Post a Comment