Convert Fr. John Sullivan to be made a saint

alma73

Interesting life of Fr. John Sullivan. Great news that he will be made a saint.

https://vimeo.com/88762639

solodeogloria

alma73 wrote: »

Interesting life of Fr. John Sullivan. Great news that he will be made a saint.

https://vimeo.com/88762639

Good evening all!

It's worth pointing out that he was already a Christian prior to his move to the Roman Catholic Church.

It's also worth pointing out that we are all saints as Christians. (Ephesians 4:12)

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

alma73

The term convert was a term he himself used, I didn't peg it on him. He was a well educated protestant but he obviously found a truer way of following Christ in the Catholic Church.

He nearly became a greek Orthodox monk at one stage before he became Catholic.

recedite

Some nice antique footage in the video.

His poor brother drowned after he went out sailing with a shotgun, intending to amuse himself by shooting at seabirds. Instead of a lifejacket, he had a belt of full of cartridges wrapped around himself. And this apparently was not unusual behaviour for the times.
It really is quite amazing the way attitudes have changed so much since then.

But what miracles are attributed to John Sullivan?
AFAIK 2 miracles are required before canonization.

alma73

Hi, I don't know the details of the miracles, but he obviously was a great man during his life.

When I heard the news at first i thought.. Jesuit.. Ah Pope making them saints, but when i read up on his life it really hit me that he did live his faith.

The guy left house, money, job ( he lacked for nothing ) and took a vow of poverty. He converted.

lazybones32

Ah, but they took the soup!

I think either the Journal or Indo had an article about this yesterday or today. They mentioned one miracle attributed to him, so that'd mean he's on the road...

recedite

alma73 wrote: »

...took a vow of poverty.

You know we are talking about a teacher at Clongowes College, right? One of the most exclusive schools in the country, with fees coming in at around €17,000 per pupil

Anyway here's the first miracle.

The miracle happened when, in 1954, Delia Farnham from Belvedere Place, Dublin, was praying to Fr John Sullivan and the cancerous tumour on her neck miraculously disappeared.

They are a bit vague on the second one.

Many miracles have been attributed to the saintly Fr Sullivan, who will always be synonymous with the People’s Church in Clongowes, where he ministered for many years and which now contains his baptismal font. John Sullivan was born in Dublin on the 8th May 1861. He was the child of a mixed marriage, was raised a Protestant and was received into the Catholic Church in 1896. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1900, was ordained priest in 1907 and appointed to the academic staff at Clongowes, where he was to spend most of the rest of his life.

Maybe it was the fact that he converted.

alma73

recedite wrote: »

You know we are talking about a teacher at Clongowes College, right? One of the most exclusive schools in the country, with fees coming in at around €17,000 per pupil

Anyway here's the first miracle.
They are a bit vague on the second one.Maybe it was the fact that he converted.

He didn't work just with the Rich, he worked with all sorts. Those are the facts.

And no matter where a Jesuit works, they have to take a vow of Poverty. If he wanted money then why did he give it away, he was a well educated wealthy Irish protestant, he lacked for nothing, had the best. Why become Catholic and take a vow of poverty?

recedite

"Taking a vow of poverty" and "living in poverty" are two different things.
It seems he was a good and spiritual man, but I doubt that he ever experienced living in poverty himself.
At Clongowes he was surrounded by well heeled students, and like the other academics there he lived in salubrious surroundings with household staff to look after all his needs. The trips on the bike to visit the "ordinary folk" around the area were probably a welcome change which helped to keep him sane.

Manach

alma73 wrote: »

Interesting life of Fr. John Sullivan. Great news that he will be made a saint.

https://vimeo.com/88762639

Follow up on RTE.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0427/784624-irish-priest-pope/
An good example for a life of service.

alma73

alma73 wrote: »

He didn't work just with the Rich, he worked with all sorts. Those are the facts.

And no matter where a Jesuit works, they have to take a vow of Poverty. If he wanted money then why did he give it away, he was a well educated wealthy Irish protestant, he lacked for nothing, had the best. Why become Catholic and take a vow of poverty?

I think you are confusing poverty with misery. When Christ said to go and sell what you have and give to the poor and to follow him, he said just that to follow him without the wealth.

The fact is that John Sullivan if he wanted to become a jesuit had to give up his wealth, he didn't have to, but he did. So for example if you visit his room you won't have a large apartment, just what is needed. He would cycle everywhere, he didn't have a wardrobe full of cloths.

I actually worked in a private Catholic School, yeap the fees are high, but when a parent looses their job and can't pay the kids didn't get turfed out during the year, and there were many students on scholarships who didn't pay. Also the funds were used to finance schools and projects for kids. For example of where do you think fr. peter mcverry gets his funds from?.

There is two types of poverty, imposed poverty and evangelical poverty, one is not a choice and the other is a choice.

recedite

I think you are confusing poverty with "giving up personal/private assets".
For example the Pope AFAIK receives no salary, so in theory he is broke. Yet he sits on a chair made of pure gold, and flies around the world in a private jet.

alma73

recedite wrote: »

I think you are confusing poverty with "giving up personal/private assets".
For example the Pope AFAIK receives no salary, so in theory he is broke. Yet he sits on a chair made of pure gold, and flies around the world in a private jet.

Hmm.. Where did you get the pure gold chair? And the private jet he flies around with? (also the Vatican under the lateran treaty with Italy is prevented from selling anything or allowing any of the art/treasures to leave Italy).


The fact remains that John Sullivan did not have to do what he did, he did not have to give up his job and his wealth. He did it because that is what Christ asked those who wanted to follow him. Not to have any attachment to material things and to follow christ.

recedite

The Vatican charters a jet for the popes trips. So the Pope does not "own" the asset, but he has the use of it whenever he needs/wants it.
If I wanted to go abroad, I'd have to save up the money for the ticket, then queue up at the airport. I'd have more cash in my pocket than the Pope, because I'd need money for my food and accomadation, which he doesn't need. Does that make me rich, and him poor?

This is the point; poverty is when you don't have access to basic necessities, not when you don't own them.

Getting back to John Sullivan, I'm not saying he wasn't genuine. He probably believed in what he was doing. He lived a fairly comfortable and rewarding life from cradle to grave. His career as a barrister may have ended due to external events anyway. During the War of Independence years, lawyers from his background worked in the Crown Courts. There was also a parallel legal system operating; the Republican Courts. After 1922 when the Crown Courts dissolved, most of the judges and barristers working in them retired or became redundant, only a few were successful at changing sides and finding positions in the Republican Courts.

You could say that Sullivan was fully integrated into the ruling elite both before and after 1922. He probably wasn't the first in his family to change religion. When it was advantageous to be a protestant, it seems they were a protestant family. When it was advantageous to be a catholic, they became catholics. Very sensible, but lets not say people like that made "the hard choices".

alma73

recedite wrote: »

The Vatican charters a jet for the popes trips. So the Pope does not "own" the asset, but he has the use of it whenever he needs/wants it.
If I wanted to go abroad, I'd have to save up the money for the ticket, then queue up at the airport. I'd have more cash in my pocket than the Pope, because I'd need money for my food and accomadation, which he doesn't need. Does that make me rich, and him poor?

This is the point; poverty is when you don't have access to basic necessities, not when you don't own them.

Getting back to John Sullivan, I'm not saying he wasn't genuine. He probably believed in what he was doing. He lived a fairly comfortable and rewarding life from cradle to grave. His career as a barrister may have ended due to external events anyway. During the War of Independence years, lawyers from his background worked in the Crown Courts. There was also a parallel legal system operating; the Republican Courts. After 1922 when the Crown Courts dissolved, most of the judges and barristers working in them retired or became redundant, only a few were successful at changing sides and finding positions in the Republican Courts.

You could say that Sullivan was fully integrated into the ruling elite both before and after 1922. He probably wasn't the first in his family to change religion. When it was advantageous to be a protestant, it seems they were a protestant family. When it was advantageous to be a catholic, they became catholics. Very sensible, but lets not say people like that made "the hard choices".

The "Gold" chair in your foto is a wooden chair painted/guilded gold.

Which church in 2016 does more to help the poor in real terms. Why not shine a light on secular society and say.. for example the 14 billion spent on porn each year could be better spent on helping the poor.. Does any of the porn industries money arrive to the poor?

Also alleging that he converted because of impending political changes in Ireland is really ludicrous. He converted during the late 1800's. John Henry Newman who later became Cardinal Newman did the same, was there political motives in his conversion, or Thomas Merton?

recedite

alma73 wrote: »

The "Gold" chair in your foto is a wooden chair painted/guilded gold.

OK, so gold leaf or gilt, instead of solid gold.
It is still a lot more valuable than what is necessary to park ones bum on.

alma73 wrote: »

Which church in 2016 does more to help the poor in real terms. Why not shine a light on secular society and say.. for example the 14 billion spent on porn each year could be better spent on helping the poor.. Does any of the porn industries money arrive to the poor?

Whats the porn industry got to do with it? Here's how our own secular society distributes foreign aid. Aid within our own country is provided by the social welfare system.
Of all the money that is collected in churches in Ireland, how much goes on funding the needs of the church itself in Ireland, how much on paying out for abuse compensation claims, how much is taken away as tribute by the Vatican, and how much is left over for charitable aid?

alma73

recedite wrote: »

OK, so gold leaf or gilt, instead of solid gold.
It is still a lot more valuable than what is necessary to park ones bum on.

and the Pope does not own it and is legally not allowed to sell it.

recedite

alma73 wrote: »

..is legally not allowed to sell it.

Very convenient. So the Vatican can accumulate treasures, but is never allowed to dispose of them. The Pope has the use of this chair if he wants it, and all the other luxuries (unlike you or me)

alma73

recedite wrote: »

Very convenient. So the Vatican can accumulate treasures, but is never allowed to dispose of them. The Pope has the use of this chair if he wants it, and all the other luxuries (unlike you or me)

Actually the treaty is with the Italian state. The Vatican is not allowed to sell of its patrimony. Same as the queen can't sell her crown. Also what is in the Vatican does not belong to the Pope, it belongs to the Church,

solodeogloria

alma73 wrote: »

The term convert was a term he himself used, I didn't peg it on him. He was a well educated protestant but he obviously found a truer way of following Christ in the Catholic Church.

He nearly became a greek Orthodox monk at one stage before he became Catholic.

Good morning all!

I think we all know that the bolded statement is highly highly highly debatable and not in any way obvious

I'm now wondering if this was put here as trollbait.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

alma73

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning all!

I think we all know that the bolded statement is highly highly highly debatable and not in any way obvious

I'm now wondering if this was put here as trollbait.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Hi, You believe what you believe is the true faith.. Right? I believe that the Catholic Church has the true faith, if someone converts, he/she returns to the true faith.

Safehands

alma73 wrote: »

Hi, You believe what you believe is the true faith.. Right? I believe that the Catholic Church has the true faith, if someone converts, he/she returns to the true faith.

What do you mean when you say the "true" faith?

alma73

Safehands wrote: »

What do you mean when you say the "true" faith?

The Faith he found. The Faith that Catholics profess.

solodeogloria

alma73 wrote: »

Hi, You believe what you believe is the true faith.. Right? I believe that the Catholic Church has the true faith, if someone converts, he/she returns to the true faith.

Good afternoon!

No I don't believe that my faith is of necessity the true faith.

I'd be honest and say aspects of Anglicanism don't work from my point of view. I can see strengths in it and weaknesses. Similarly I find teaching in other denominations particularly helpful and useful. Particularly free church, Calvinist / Presbyterian and Lutheran influences.

My point isn't that Anglicanism is the true faith but rather that God is true and His Word is reliable and we need to be constantly Reformed according to it.

That's the fresh air that Biblical Christianity offers to those who put God's Word above religious authorities. I could be mistaken and I am still growing and God willing will mature more.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

alma73

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

No I don't believe that my faith is of necessity the true faith.

I'd be honest and say aspects of Anglicanism don't work from my point of view. I can see strengths in it and weaknesses. Similarly I find teaching in other denominations particularly helpful and useful. Particularly free church, Calvinist / Presbyterian and Lutheran influences.

My point isn't that Anglicanism is the true faith but rather that God is true and His Word is reliable and we need to be constantly Reformed according to it.

That's the fresh air that Biblical Christianity offers to those who put God's Word above religious authorities. I could be mistaken and I am still growing and God willing will mature more.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Christ in the Gospel spoke on absolute terms. He is the way, he is the Truth, he is the life. I'm sure we would agree on many things.

There are elements of Truth in many Churches, the Catholic Church spoke about this in the document Gaudium et Spes in 1965.

Biblical Christianity, it was the Ecclesia that gave you the pages you read. It was the Ecclesia united that saw the word of God in those writings and decided which were sacred and which were not. Luke was a member of the Church.

There is absolute truth in faith and it can only be found with prayer and a search for truth and being open to the Holy Spirit. My words are dust and meaningless.

solodeogloria

Good afternoon!

I agree that Jesus spoke in absolute terms concerning the Gospel and the Christian faith.

Neither Roman Catholicism or Anglicanism have a monopoly on these things. They are both fragile, and in many cases failed human denominations.

But God graciously puts up with us and builds his church to convey the Gospel even to rulers and authorities (Ephesians 3:10).

The Roman Catholic Church isn't the only true source of Christianity. Neither is the Anglican Church.

Only Jesus is the way the truth and the life, to suggest anything else is utter blasphemy.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

alma73

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I agree that Jesus spoke in absolute terms concerning the Gospel and the Christian faith.

Neither Roman Catholicism or Anglicanism have a monopoly on these things. They are both fragile, and in many cases failed human denomination.

But God gracioisly puts up with us and builds his church to convey the Gospel even to rulers and authorities (Ephesians 3:10).

The Roman Catholic Church isn't the only true source of Christianity. Neither is the Anglican Church.

Only Jesus is the way the truth and the life, to suggest anything else is utter blasphemy.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

I'm not talking about monopoly here. Christ spoke in absolute terms, he preached and message and gave that message to preach to his apostles. It was one message. Those men did as Christ said and went a preached the message to all men. The people they preached it to in Salonica or Rome were preached the same faith, part of the same church, same Ecclesia. If you go to the caves in Turkey you will see the same frescos as Rome.

The Catholic Church has always said that only Jesus is the way truth and the life. I'm not disagreeing. But if you want to turn every argument on the Catholic faith into protestant terms of reference then we will have to disagree. The bible was not written prior to the Church, it was written in the Church by members of the Church, and as the Bible itself said not everything is written in the Bible that Christ did and its also not written in the Bible that members of the Church have to only believe what is written there any nothing else.

So if you want to Continue with the 500 year old Protestant-Catholic debate there is already a thread about this open in this forum. This thread was about John Sullivan an Irish protestant who became a Catholic Saint.

Safehands

alma73 wrote: »

The Faith he found. The Faith that Catholics profess.

Good morning Alma.
This is part of what we were told when we were younger. The RC church is the "one true church". In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Throughout the years this church preached, and practised, hatred and bile. They butchered people because they were not "of the faith".
Christ, from what we know about him, was a loving, kind person who would never harm, or bad-mouth anyone. He preached tolerance and love. He advised his followers to give up material goods and follow him.
The Catholic church, on the other hand, peached hatred. Hatred of other Christian churches whose teachings deviated from their strict pronouncements. They terrorised parents into believing that if they didn't have their babies baptised in their church, they would suffer in the next life, in a place they made up, called Limbo.
Only last week, on the radio we heard of this church's plea for the poor and destitute to hand over whatever precious gold and jewelry they had, so that they could make elaborate crowns for statues in their churches. This is not the behavior of a Christian church.
Alma, this is why the protestant churches were founded. Enlightened men saw how the church was behaving, and decided to change things.
Fr. Sullivan, was probably a very good man, much like thousands of low profile, good men and women throughout Ireland and the rest of the Christian world. People who went about their daily lives working hard to support their families and friends, who died and had low profile funerals with a single priest officiating. They are all saints. They don't need elaborate, opulent ceremonies to declare they have arrived in Heaven.

alma73

@safehands... So your not a Catholic and don't believe in our faith. Fine, Last I checked there is still freedom of religion. Catholics believe we are the one true Church that Christ found.. You don't. Such is life.

Safehands

alma73 wrote: »

@safehands... So your not a Catholic and don't believe in our faith. Fine, Last I checked there is still freedom of religion. Catholics believe we are the one true Church that Christ found.. You don't. Such is life.

Actually I was born a Catholic. I have friends who are priests. Believe it or not they don't buy into "The one true church" belief either. Neither do most of my Catholic friends.
You see Alma, when you make statements like that, you are dismissing a whole swathe of good people, who may be Church of Ireland, Hindu, Muslim or non religious. They all have beliefs which are just as valid as yours or mine. If they are leading good lives, like most of the people I know, they are surely going to be rewarded in the next life, if such a life actually exists. Using your logical mind and dismissing that which seems illogical to you, is a very honest way to think. And that type of honesty should never be dismissed, even if in death, their logical minds turn out to have been wrong and they are confronted with a smiling God who winks at them and says "I bet you fell a bit silly right now. Welcome my friend".

alma73

@Safehands. That is the teaching of the Catholic Church, if people don't "buy into it" that is their choice. Christ spoke with absolute terms. You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church,... not Church"s".

Safehands

alma73 wrote: »

@Safehands. That is the teaching of the Catholic Church, if people don't "buy into it" that is their choice. Christ spoke with absolute terms. You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church,... not Church"s".

Not very absolute at all. Very metaphorical actually. Lots can be read into that statement. Christian churches all claim to represent his teachings. The clue is in the word "Christian".

alma73

Safehands wrote: »

Not very absolute at all. Very metaphorical actually. Lots can be read into that statement. Christian churches all claim to represent his teachings. The clue is in the word "Christian".

I'm not here to tell you what to believe, just what True Catholics believe which happens to be the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Other Church's have their elements of truth, but are not the one true Church. That is what the Catholic Church teaches.

solodeogloria

Good afternoon!

alma73 - if you make grand pronouncements about the Roman Catholic Church being the only true church you're inviting questioning. Lots of us want to know why you believe that.

You grilled me about the Solas of the Protestant Reformation and I answered you.

You should answer fair questions about your posts.

We need to be fair but also gentle and respectful and I only want to offer respectful criticism of Catholicism. It isn't fair not to answer my questions because I ask from a Protestant point of view. I answer your questions from a Catholic point of view always. Don't I?

You knew this thread would be controversial particularly when you stated Catholicism was more true without a reason.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

alma73

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!
alma73 - if you make grand pronouncements about the Roman Catholic Church being the only true church you're inviting questioning.
solodeogloria

Then send your questions to the Vatican. I didn't invent the Catholic Church, Christ did.

Safehands

alma73 wrote: »

I'm not here to tell you what to believe, just what True Catholics believe which happens to be the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Other Church's have their elements of truth, but are not the one true Church. That is what the Catholic Church teaches.

Yes, and that teaching is clearly wrong.

They also teach that missing mass on a Sunday is a mortal sin, as is not fasting on Good Friday and Ash Wednesday, not contributing to the upkeep of the church and not going to confession once a year.
Obviously these teachings are for a bygone era, when uneducated, non questioning people formed the majority of their conregations.

I doubt that even the Pope believes this type of nonsense any more.

solodeogloria

alma73 wrote: »

Then send your questions to the Vatican. I didn't invent the Catholic Church, Christ did.

Good afternoon!

Another unsubstantiated claim that Roman Catholicism is apostolic. There's no evidence for that. I suspect the reason why you can't answer my question is because there isn't an answer. That's fine. There's no need to pretend otherwise.

But I digress. Let's leave it there.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

alma73

Catholic/Protestant debate --> http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056276995