Phoebe wrote: |
|
Hi, guys —
I'm not religious, but I'm a writer, and I want to represent a Catholic character of mine consistently and in good faith. I would also like to know more about the details of papal authority.
Specifically, in this circumstance, time is being reversed in bursts on Earth, but not in any spiritual realm, or for this character — meaning that this character, Heaven, ghosts, God, and so on, experience time linearly, but for all the rest of the world, the year 1999 might lead to the year 1950, bringing the state of the world back to that time, with only those aforementioned having knowledge of what is now the "future". So, my questions are:
- how would someone treat the authority of a present Pope or religious guidelines when knowing different information from the future?
- Would a saint canonized by Pope John Paul II still be considered worthy of veneration in the year 1950 despite not being categorized as a saint at that time, because you "know" they will be eventually?
- Are the changes to canonical law made by the Pope enduringly true once you're made aware of them, or is it more proper to follow the guidelines that exist in the moment even if you know more "modern" practices — such as leaving out the Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary before 2002?
I hope you find this comprehensible and respectful; I mean it as a legitimate question, and I'm not trying to mock or poke holes into any response.
Thank you!
Phoebe
|
| { As a writer, can you help me properly represent a faithful Catholic character for a future piece? } |
Bob replied:
|
Dear Phoebe,
I’m not sure if you received a response from any of the team yet, but here is a quick take.
Any information regarding the future, whether certain or dubious, would be treated as “private revelation”, and would not have any formally binding impact on any Catholic, presuming he could time travel. So, the knowledge about whether someone was to be canonized or not would simply bear relevance only to the holder of the knowledge. That person could choose to utilize such knowledge personally or not. He could venerate the future “saint” as if they were canonized but could ignore it as well. There basically isn't any moral impact on the individual for any culpability with said knowledge. They are bound to the canon laws of the Church as they stand in time, but when it comes to personal devotions, they have liberty to be devoted to persons that led pious lives.
- For example, how could one ever become an official saint and have miracles if no one ever sought their intercession for such?
They aren't on the honor roll until they have some honors so to speak, so praying to saints official or unofficial is no sin. The same would hold true for other devotions like the Luminous mysteries of the Rosary (how to, history). Anyone can make up a set of mysteries to reflect on, but there is certain value added to particular devotions that gain indulgences, which is why many stick to tradition.
The traditional Rosary is a blessed gift, and Fr. Donald Calloway has compiled a great work on its history and development, along with the providential origins if you wanted to know more about that particular devotion.
Peace,
Bob Kirby |
|
|
