Popes John XXIII and John Paul II become saints, witnessed by thousands

April 27, 2014

Vatican City, Apr 27: Pope Francis proclaimed his predecessors John XXIII and John Paul II saints on Sunday in front of hundreds of thousands of pilgrims celebrating two 20th century giants of the Roman Catholic Church.pope

Cheers and applause rang out across St Peter's Square after the historic double canonization as many in the crowd fixed their gaze on huge tapestries of the two popes on the facade of the basilica behind Francis.

"We declare and define Blessed John XXIII and John Paul II to be saints and we enrol them among the saints, decreeing that they are to be venerated as such by the whole Church," Francis said in his formal proclamation in Latin about 30 minutes into the solemn service.

The crowd was so large it stretched back along all of Via della Conciliazione, the half kilometer-long, broad boulevard that starts at the Tiber river. Even its bridges were packed with pilgrims.

The Mass, which began under a light rain, was also attended by former Pope Benedict, who last year became the first pontiff in six centuries to step down. Benedict walked with a cane and was dressed in white vestments

His attendance gave the ceremony a somewhat surreal atmosphere created by the presence of reigning pope, a retired pope and two dead popes buried in the basilica behind the altar.

John XXIII, who reigned from 1958 to 1963 and called the modernizing Second Vatican Council, and John Paul II, the Pole who reigned for nearly 27 years, played a leading role on the world stage.

The overwhelming majority in the crowd were Poles who had traveled from their home country and immigrant communities as far afield as Chicago and Sydney to watch their most famous native son become a saint.

Hundreds of red and white Polish flags filled the square and the streets surrounding the Vatican, which were strewn with sleeping bags, backpacks and folding chairs. It was one of the biggest crowds since John Paul's beatification in 2011.

"For years Pope John Paul II took the Church to the ends of the earth and today the ends of the earth have come back here," said Father Tom Rosica, head of Canada's Salt and Light Catholic television network.

Twelve-hour wait

Families and other pilgrims had waited for more than 12 hours along the main street leading to the Vatican before police opened up the square at 5:30am.

Some people said they had managed to sleep on their feet because the crowd was so thick.

About 850 cardinals and bishops were celebrating the Mass with the pope and 700 priests were on hand to distribute communion to the huge crowd.

Francis' own huge popularity has added extra appeal to the unprecedented ceremony to raise two former leaders of the church to sainthood on the same day. But while both were widely revered, there has also been criticism that John Paul II, who only died nine years ago, has been canonized too quickly.

Groups representing victims of sexual abuse by Catholic priests also say he did not do enough to root out a scandal that emerged towards the end of his pontificate and which has hung over the church ever since.

The controversy did nothing to put off the rivers of Catholic faithful who have been arriving in Rome over the past few days.

"It is a great joy, an immense joy, because there is happiness everywhere and this is not an empty happiness," said Guillemette Chevalier, from France.

"Here we have found the joy of being together in the Church around two extraordinary men ... who give meaning to our lives. It is true happiness," she said.

Tight security

About 10,000 police and security personnel and special paramedic teams were deployed and large areas of Rome were closed to traffic.

Pilgrims who did not want to battle the crowd spent the night praying in Rome churches left open especially for the event and would watch the event on large television screens around the city.

The election of the Argentinian-born Pope Francis has injected fresh enthusiasm into a Church beset by sexual and financial scandals during the papacy of his predecessor Benedict XVI, who last year became the first pope to resign in 600 years.

He now lives in secluded retirement but will be present at the canonization mass, which will symbolically bring together four popes. The two new saints are buried in crypts in St. Peter's Basilica.

The fact that the two being canonized are widely seen as representing contrasting faces of the Church has added to the significance of an event that Francis hopes will draw the world's 1.2 billion Catholics closer together.

John, an Italian often known as the "Good Pope" because of his friendly, open personality, died before the Second Vatican Council ended its work in 1965 but his initiative set off one of the greatest upheavals in Church teaching in modern times.

The Council ended the use of Latin at Mass, brought in the use of modern music and opened the way for challenges to Vatican authority, which alienated some traditionalists.

John Paul was widely credited with helping to bring down communist rule in eastern Europe and hastening the end of the cold war. He continued many of the reforms but tightened central control, condemned theological renegades and preached a stricter line on social issues such as sexual freedom.

A charismatic, dominant pope, he was criticized by some as a rigid conservative but the adoration he inspired was shown by the huge crowds whose chants of "santo subito!" (make him a saint at once!) at his funeral 2005 were answered with the fastest declaration of sainthood in modern history.

Both canonizations have involved some adaptation of the normally strict rules governing declaration of a saint, which involve a close examination of each candidate's life and works and normally the attestation of at least two miracles.

Benedict waived a rule that normally requires a five-year waiting period before the preliminaries to sainthood can even begin to speed up John Paul's canonization, while Francis ruled that only one miracle was needed to declare John a saint.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 16,2020

Varanasi, Feb 16: Amidst continuing protests against the amended citizenship law, Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday said his government stood by the decision despite all pressure.

"Be it the decision on Article 370 or the Citizenship Amendment Act, it was necessary in the interest of the country. Despite pressure, we stand by our decision and will remain so," he said.

Modi was addressing a public meeting in his Lok Sabha constituency.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi also asserted that the trust set up for construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya will work "rapidly".

"A trust has been formed for construction of a grand Ram temple in Ayodhya. This trust will work rapidly," he said at a public meeting during his day-long visit to his Lok Sabha constituency.

The government had recently set up the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra on the Supreme Court's directive to the Union government to form a trust that can look into the construction and management of the temple.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 1,2020

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 22,2020

New Delhi, Jul 22: With a spike of 37,724 cases and 648 deaths reported in the last 24 hours, the total number of COVID-19 cases in India stands at 11,92,915, according to the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

The total number of cases includes 4,11,133 active cases, 7,53,050 cured/discharged/migrated and 28,732 deaths, the Health Ministry informed.

Maharashtra remains the worst affected state with 3,27,031 cases and 12,276 deaths.
The second worst-hit state, Tamil Nadu has reported 1,80,643 COVID-19 cases so far while Delhi has reported 1,25,096 cases, according to the Ministry.

Other states that have witnessed a higher number of COVID-19 positive cases include, Andhra Pradesh with 58,668 cases, Karnataka with 71,069 while Telangana has reported 47,705 COVID-19 positive cases.

Meanwhile, as per the information provided by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), the total number of samples tested up to July 21 is 1,47,24, 546 including 3,43,243 samples tested yesterday.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.