It’s official: Paul VI and Oscar Romero will be canonized

Though no date has yet been announced, both are expected to be canonized together during the Synod of Bishops in October

People carry a picture of late Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero during a march ahead of the 34th anniversary of his assassination in San Salvador on March 22, 2014. (Photo courtesy of REUTERS/Jessica Orellana)

The Vatican announced Wednesday that Pope Francis has recognized a second miracle allowing five people on the path to sainthood to be canonized, the most prominent being Bl. Pope Paul VI and Bl. Oscar Romero.

Though no date has yet been announced, both Paul VI and Oscar Romero are expected to be canonized together during the Synod of Bishops in October.

Apart from his role in overseeing the Second Vatican Council, Paul VI is most widely know for his landmark encyclical Humanae Vitae, which was published in 1968 and reaffirmed the Church’s teaching against contraception in wake of the sexual revolution. This year marks the 50th anniversary the historic encyclical, making the canonization of the author all the more relevant.

Both miracles attributed to Paul VI’s intercession involve the healing of an unborn child.

Bl. Oscar Romero, who was beatified by Pope Francis May 23, 2015, in El Salvador, was the archbishop of the nation’s capital city of San Salvador. He was shot while celebrating Mass March 24, 1980, during the birth of a civil war between leftist guerrilla forces and the dictatorial government of the right.

An outspoken critic of the violence and injustices being committed at the time, Romero was declared a martyr who was killed in hatred of the faith for his vocal defense of human rights.

During the meeting, Francis advanced a total of 13 saints’ causes, recognizing at least one person as a martyr and allowing one religious sister to be beatified.

Additionally, he recognized the martyrdom of Slavic laywoman Anna Kolesárová. Born in Vysoká nad Uhom, Slovakia in 1928, she was killed by a drunken Soviet soldier near the end of the Second World War in 1944 for refusing his sexual advances.

At the time, Soviet troops were passing through Kolesárová’s district, which was then a part of Hungary, and occupied her village on the way. When one soldier entered her home and found the family in hiding, he attempted to sleep with Kolesárová, threatening her with death if she did not comply.  

However, raised in a pious Catholic family, Kolesárová refused, and as a result was shot in front of her family at the age of 16.

Full story at Catholic News Agency.



To add a comment, click on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ icons OR go further down to the bottom of comments to the Post your comment box.


  1. Kristin says:

    It used to take much longer for the Church to declare someone a saint, hundreds of years in many cases. The fast tracking of popular figures these days causes some concern that the process is being manipulated for a variety of reasons, including political ones. So Rome, why the 21st century rush?

    • Linda Maria says:

      I know the Vatican can seem strange, about canonizations. I think it is hard, in our modern world, to imagine that truly saintly Catholics might even exist! And most of them come from Catholic countries, in which they are well-known, too, for their sanctity. We don’t have much of that, in America! Bl. Abp.Romero was well-known, by fellow Salvadorans, for his sanctity. In past eras, many beloved saints were famous during their lifetimes, for their sanctity, and were quickly canonized– St. Francis of Assissi was canonized less than two years after his death, and St. Thomas a Becket was canonized about three yeears after his death– many pilgrims claimed miracles! To me, the whole thing is mysterious!

    • Anonymous says:

      You should have more faith in God.

  2. The modern V2 Church perhaps feels a need to recognize modern heros, declaring them saints to add credibility of the Vatican and it’s liberal changes and direction they have invoked over the last 50+ years. So let’s see, in just the last 10 years, 3 out of 4 deceased post-conciliar bishops of Rome: John the XXIIIrd, Paul the VIth, and JohnPaul the IInd have been declared saints. By comparison and historically speaking, in the Roman Catholic Church prior to the V2 Council (pre-conciliar), the last two Pope Saints were Pope Pius the Vth and Pope Pius the Xth. There is over a 400 year period between their Pontifical reigns, and Pope St. Pius the Xth’s reign was at the beginning of the 20th century! No doubt there were many good popes…

    • Anonymous says:

      Bruce, they are really in Heaven. No person who dies in schism can go to Heaven. Please read the Catechism of Trent to understand the True Faith and the true One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
      I have seem belief statements by traditionalists which change this to Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church. Be wary…

    • Anonymous says:

      I would like to see Pope Leo XIII canonized but I don’t think a cause has ever been opened for him.

  3. Awakening More And More says:

    I never thought I would see the day when Montini (Paul VI) would be even “considered” for canonization as a saint. Has anyone read The New Montinian Church by Fr. Joaquin Saenz Y Arriaga, PhD? How about the book Nikita and Roncalli – Unknown Aspects of a Pope by Franco Bellegrandi? It is difficult to swallow that the Church is planning on canonizing a character like Montini.

  4. William Roberts says:

    Awakening: Father Saenz Y Arriaga may not be a good source for information regarding Pope Paul VI. Father Saenz Y Arriaga was harshly critical of Vatican Council II and was excommunicated by the Catholic Bishops Conference of Mexico in 1972. He may be a bit biased.

    • bohemond says:

      ” Father Saenz Y Arriaga was harshly critical of Vatican Council II” and rightly so…. look at it results

  5. Anonymous, Which anonymous are you? You seem to have missed my point, and I won’t waste my time trying to explain it to you. I have a copy of the Catechism of Trent which I read now and then as it is far superior in Roman Catholic theology than the recently written V2 Catechism which reads like an etiquette book. I also have a copy of the most accurate English translation of the Roman Catholic Holy Bible, the Douay-Rheims that I love to read, Fr. Haydock’s Commentaries, both volumes of Explanations of the Epistles and Gospels by Rev Leonard Goffine that is fantastic, the Sources of Catholic Dogma by Denzinger and Fr. James Meagher’s “How Christ said the First Mass” to name just a few of…

    • Anonymous says:

      Your use of the term V2 Church indicates a problem with understanding the One Holy Catholic and Aoostolic Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is not an etiquette book by any means. It explains the Faith, the Sacraments, the 10 Commandments and Catholic Prayer.

  6. Awakening More And More says:

    William Roberts, everyone is biased. The question is who is correct.

    MANY people, after having examined the issues,
    believe that Father Saenz Y Arriaga is correct,
    and that Montini was in the wrong.

    Many Mexican people remember the Cristeros;
    and they are “WOKE” with respect to what Montini did,
    and what really happened at Vatican 2.

    Dear William Roberts, with all due respect, please wake up!

  7. Linda Maria says:

    When they made Pope Paul VI a “Blessed,” I could find no life story, about his holiness! I didn’t much care for his New Mass, but it’s fine, anyway. I think Bl. Pope Paul VI may have had some very painful times, during his pontificate! He made the remark, that each night of his pontificate, was very hard, and that he so often “slept on a crown of thorns!” Many people opposed him, with his “Humanae Vitae,” as well as some areas of Vatican II! LOVED his painful, tragic statement, that “the smoke of Satan has entered the Church!” I like to read life stories, about holy Catholic men and women, explaining about their unusual gifts of sanctity– maybe there is a new book, all about the life and holiness, of this Pope!

  8. Canonization is as valid as the prelate who conducts it.

  9. Awakening More And More says:

    Anonymous, you know that there are good popes, bad popes, + anti-popes, right?
    Some people think Montini was a good pope, others think he was a bad pope,
    still others believe Montini was an anti-pope (+ that Siri was the truly elected pope).

    So, what do you mean by your question?
    You asked:
    “Do you just not (sic) understand what the Pope is and what the Church is?”

    • Anonymous says:

      Whether YOU think “Montini” was an anti-Pope, ore wasn’t a validly elected Pope is irrelevant. Whether good or bad (all of us make mistakes, and he is no exception), Pope Saint Paul VI was a legitimate Pope, now known to be in heaven.

    • Anonymous says:

      You are calling him Montini. Pope Paul VI is his name. He was not an anti-pope. Whether someone thinks he is a good pope or bad pope is irrelevant to his actions as Pope. The Pope is the descendant of Peter. The 10 or so “bad Popes” were bad as a person; they never taught against Faith or Morals. The Pope is the head of the Catholic Church. He is the Vicar of Christ. He holds the keys to the Kingdom. God backs him just like he backed Moses. The Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ. This is from Holy Scripture. It is not very wise to let 50 year old gossip or whatever you are reading to influence you.

    • Anonymous says:

      Criticism of the Pope can become a mortal sin if one’s criticism is filled with a hatred and vitriol that shows a lack of respect or filial love for Our Sovereign Pontiff. One must also consider to whom you show that lack of respect. If by your words and actions you harm his reputation with others unjustly, you do him and them a grave wrong. You also may be committing the sin of sacrilege.
      The Pope is Christ’s Vicar, and deserves all the respect of that office.
      Father Zulsdorf

  10. Awakening More And More says:

    Anonymous, I do not know whom you directed your comment:
    “Apparently you are a sedevacantist schismatic.”
    Catholic Answers stated that Traditional Catholics
    who are sedevacantists are indeed schismatic,
    but not heretical. They believe what every Catholic
    believed prior to Vatican II.

    • Anonymous says:

      Different anonymous. Every Catholic didn’t believe the Catholic Faith prior to Vatican II. Obviously.
      I would disagree with saying that schismatics are not heretics because schismatics don’t believe in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Obviously, they think they can just start their own church. They may give lip service to it but it is like saying “I believe in traditional marriage” while you are having an affair.

  11. Awakening More And More says:

    Anonymous, you stated that you: “disagree with saying that schismatics are not heretics because schismatics don’t believe in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.”
    It depends on WHY someone is a schismatic. Would you agree?
    Some Catholics DO believe the Church is One, Holy, Catholic, + Apostolic Church.
    They also believe in everything that was universally taught
    by the Church prior to the 1960’sto be part of Catholic Tradition .
    However, they are schismatic wrt what they call the Novus Ordo teachings.
    They believe that there has been one or more antipopes after 1958.
    They believe that many of the “NOVEL” teachings of the Novus Ordo Church are not Catholic.
    Hence they are schismatic, but not heretical, since they…

  12. Awakening More And More says:

    In sum . . . Traditional Catholics who are sedevacantists never made a change in belief.
    Just the opposite, they preserved the Catholic Tradition unchanged after the 1960’s.
    That is why they are schismatic but not heretical. Namely, because
    what they believe is what all Catholics were taught to believe before the 1960’s.
    The schism arose because Novus Ordo changes were introduced in the 1960’s.
    The traditional Catholics who are sedevacantists believe these changes were invalid.
    Therefore they believe that those who introduced these were “Catholic in name only”,
    including one or more popes since 1958. (BTW, I never gave my own opinion on the
    issue of Novus Ordo Catholics vs Traditional Catholics, please keep this in mind.)

    • Anonymous says:

      Those excuses don’t work because if you believe the Church’s teaching from the Council of Trent and the words of Jesus in Holy Scripture you would not separate from the Catholic Church because you know you would go to hell. You would not say “I determine what is and isn’t Catholic.” Ignorance of lay people is exploited by these priests in mortal sin. There is ONE Holy Catholic Church founded on the Apostles with Peter as it’s head. Once these priests left to start their own churches they started splintering just like the Protestants did because when you are not united under obedience to Peter there is nothing to keep that from happening. Whether schismatic and heretical or just schismatic it is a mortal sin.

  13. Awakening More And More says:

    Anonymous, are you saying that after the Vatican 2 Council,
    the Novus Ordo priests who left the one true Catholic Church
    started their own church + are thus schismatic + heretical?
    If so, you would be in agreement with those who consider themselves
    to be faithful, traditional Catholics who hold sedevacantist views.

    For example, they believe that at the Council of Trent, in particular with
    the 1570 papal bull “Quo primum”, there was an infallible decree that the
    Mass may not be altered. They believe that the Novus Ordo”Catholic” Church
    is schismatic and heretical, because they (Novus Ordo priests) made
    heretical changes and started their own church. Is that what you are saying?

    Their claim is that . . .

    • Anonymous says:

      By redefining schism, they try to make their mortal sin acceptable. Schism is a refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff (currently Pope Francis) or a refusal to join in worship with the communion headed by him.
      You might find interesting some of the conversations and articles they write for each other. I remember reading a conversation where they knew that they had committed mortal sin and according to the Church’s teaching would be going to hell but were hoping that it would be overlooked by God, forgiven without repentance and even condoned by God because of what they see as their special circumstances.

  14. Awakening More And More says:

    A schism means there is a division.
    Regardless of who started it, or who is in the right,
    if there is a division, there is a schism.
    The sedevacantists believe that Bergoglio is not a true pope,
    that he is a false claimant to the papcy (also called an antipope).
    he would not be the first. Prior to 1958, the Catholic Church listed
    around 42 or 43 antipopes, I don’t remember the exact number.
    That is why they call themselves sedevacantists from
    sede vacante meaning the seat (of Peter) is empty.
    They believe if there is currently a pope, he is not Bergoglio.
    Some believe Ratzinger is still pope, that he did not resign from being a pope.
    Other sedevacantists believe there has not been a true “public” pope since 1958,

    • Anonymous says:

      There is no division.. To put it bluntly, the sedevacantists and other schismatics are no longer Catholic.
      The sedevacantists are wrong. They use Catholic history to sow doubt. Willful doubts are a sin.
      Pope Francis is the Pope. They may not want him to be but he is.
      You should not poison your mind with such sinful teachings.

    • Anonymous says:

      For in after ages there would not be wanting wicked men who, like the ape that would fain pass for a man, would claim that they alone were Catholics, and with no less impiety than effrontery assert that with them alone is the Catholic Church.
      Pope St. Pius V, The Catechism of Trent

  15. Anonymous says:

    “there are but three classes of persons excluded from the Church’s pale: infidels, heretics and schismatics, and excommunicated persons.”
    Pope St. Pius V, The Catechism of Trent

  16. Anonymous says:

    Following no chief but Christ, I am united in communion with your Holiness, that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that on that rock is built the Church. Whoever will eat the lamb outside this house is profane; whoever is not in the ark of Noah shall perish in the .flood. St Jerome as quoted by Pope st. Pius V in the Catechism of Trent

  17. Anonymous says:

    Awakening…The independent Catholic Churches are just a different version of Protestantism. So, instead of indulgences, they protested Vatican II and left the Church. They do not obey Christ. They do not obey the Popes prior to Vatican II. They do not obey the Canon Law prior to Vatican II. Because they are not in union with the Pope. They do not have the authority to declare a Pope invalid. They are in mortal sin and THEY KNOW IT. but they don’t tell the people who come to their churches. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing. I ask through the intercession of Mary, Help of Christians, that the scales would fall from the eyes of those who follow them. May every saint they invoke intercede for their true conversion and for the…

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.