The Church is not immune to culture, ultimately it is made up of men of its time and must transmit its messages in those spatial, temporal and, therefore, cultural coordinates. In that sense, it is not impervious to the “politically correct” fashion or the “woke” or “cancellation” trend. It seems that there have been saints – people who, we can safely assume, are in Heaven – who, however, have been “canceled” and cannot be canonized. This claim to declare them “saints before their time” is not gratuitous, since they have a reputation for holiness, their lives have left a deep trail of good in the Church and in the history of humanity, and their lives have been conscientiously studied. What is your mistake? Trying to access the altars at the wrong time.
Without doing exhaustive research, two examples come to mind: the Servant of God Elizabeth the Catholic and Venerable Fulton J. Sheen. Isabel I of Castile died with a reputation for sanctity, although her process began very late, in 1974, that is, it would be a historical process that would try to determine her reputation for sanctity throughout the centuries, as a kind of “immemorial cult” in the style of Blessed Duns Scotus, which in turn determines, through strict historical inquiry, how he heroically lived the Christian virtues. Apart from that, Christianity and Western civilization owe an enormous debt to Elizabeth: thanks to her support, America was discovered, and she was a defender of the rights of indigenous people as human beings, anticipating the Declaration of Independence of the United States by centuries. In effect, the queen treats them as free subjects and recognizes their human rights. From that moment on, the kings of Spain considered themselves protectors of the indigenous people, at least during the Habsburg reign. It is true that some colonizers found a way to avoid the law, but the law was written and was promulgated by Elizabeth I.
What is the unforgivable sin of Isabel the Catholic? The expulsion of the Sephardic Jews from the kingdom of Spain. Understanding this fact involves diving into its historical context. Obviously, with 21st century eyes it seems outrageous, but perhaps it was not so outrageous from the perspective of the 15th century, which was when the events occurred. Just at that time, the concept of “nation” or “state” in its modern sense was being forged. The nobility lost power, which was concentrated in the figure of the kings. There were various elements that made up the cocktail of a nation: a single king, a single language, a single currency, a single religion. For this reason, in the following century the slogan was adopted: “cuius regio, eius religio”, that is: depending on the religion of the king, that will be the religion of the people he governs. And this standard was adopted throughout the European territory. That is to say, looking at the religious context, it was a “normal” measure, although objectively unfair; but that injustice was beyond the queen’s horizon of interpretation. Her beatification would be a serious blow to the interreligious dialogue maintained with the Jews since the Second Vatican Council, and for that reason she is on stand-by.
The case of Venerable Fulton J. Sheen is more surprising. His process began during the pontificate of Saint John Paul II, declared Venerable by Benedict XVI, approved by Francis the miracle that should open the doors to beatification – finally, a documented miracle attributed to his intercession would be like the notarial act that is actually in Heaven -, his beatification date set for December 21, 2019, was suspended a few days before it was celebrated. This event, without a doubt, is new in the ancient history of the Church, something like this had never happened. The reason? One bishop judged that Bishop Sheen’s behavior with a priest who engaged in sexual misconduct in 1963 could be misunderstood by the New York Attorney General. Needless to say, the historical investigation conducted during the trial completely exonerated Sheen from the case, stating flatly that he “had never put children in danger.” But, given the current commotion over the sad case of clerical pedophilia, where there is no presumption of innocence, but of guilt, they advised putting his beatification in the freezer, despite his miracle, the fruits of his preaching and his magnificent conversions’ doctrine.
Looking back, I think that some of the greatest saints in the history of the Church would not be canonized by today’s criteria. Two examples come to mind: Saint Ambrose of Milan and Saint Cyril of Alexandria. Saint Ambrose is guilty of what we could call “the first burning of a Synagogue in history”, perpetrated by monks in Raqqa, present-day Syria. Emperor Theodosius attempted to punish the guilty, but Ambrose, a furious anti-Semite, prevented him from doing so, suggesting that the Church had the right to do so. While Saint Cyril of Alexandria, who was also anti-Semitic (he destroyed his Synagogue and expelled them from Alexandria), is blamed for instigating the savage murder that the mob perpetrated against Hypatia of Alexandria, philosopher, mathematician and astronomer. It should be noted that both are doctors of the Church and “champions of orthodoxy”: Saint Cyril is the main promoter, within the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD, that Mary continued to consider herself “Theotokós”, that is, “Mother of God” and Saint Ambrose from the conversion of Saint Augustine, perhaps the most prominent Catholic thinker in history. But in his time, being anti-Semitic did not block your way to the altars.
In his time, anti-Semitism was not a sin, now it is. The Church has recognized, perhaps a little late, its part of the blame in the formation of anti-Semitism thanks to the great Saint John Paul II, who in the context of the “purification of memory” published: “We remember: A reflection on the Shoah ”. Saint Ambrose, Saint Cyril and Isabella the Catholic acted with a good conscience, although what they did was objectively wrong. But in their time this was not perceived and this did not prevent the first two from accessing the altars, but the last one did. I think the same thing happens to Fulton J. Sheen, during his life there was not the sensitivity that there is now, and that is why the Church hesitates to use them as an example. But, finally, I think that they don’t care about that, because they will surely already be enjoying the vision of God in Heaven, even if we don’t want to recognize it.
