Did the Church Ever Regret Opposing a Saint?

Brief Overview

• The Catholic Church has faced situations where it initially opposed or questioned individuals later recognized as saints, reflecting the complex process of discerning holiness and truth.
• Saint Joan of Arc was condemned to death by Church authorities in 1431, but her conviction was later overturned through a retrial, and she was canonized in 1920.
• Saint Thérèse of Lisieux faced skepticism from some in the Church during her lifetime, yet she was canonized less than thirty years after her death and is now recognized as a Doctor of the Church.
• Saint Ignatius of Loyola was investigated by the Inquisition due to misunderstandings about his spiritual practices, though he was eventually cleared and his methods were approved.
• The Church’s process of canonization involves careful study and discernment, which can take decades or centuries, sometimes revealing that earlier judgments were incomplete or mistaken.
• These cases show that the Church values truth and sanctity above pride, willing to correct course when new evidence or understanding emerges.

The Nature of Church Opposition and Discernment

The Catholic Church has a long history of being cautious about claims of holiness and spiritual authority. This caution serves an important purpose, as the Church must protect the faithful from false prophets and misleading teachings. The process of recognizing sanctity has always involved careful examination and testing of spirits. Many saints faced opposition during their lifetimes not because the Church was hostile to holiness, but because the Church needed to verify that individuals’ spiritual experiences and teachings aligned with Catholic faith. The discernment process can be slow and sometimes painful for the individuals involved. Church leaders in different eras have made mistakes in their judgment, just as people in any field can make errors. The recognition of error does not suggest that the Church lacks guidance or truth, but rather that the Church works through human beings who must sometimes correct their own missteps. This honest acknowledgment of past mistakes actually strengthens the Church’s credibility. Many cases exist where initial opposition gave way to eventual recognition and canonization. The story of these individuals shows how the Church can grow in understanding and wisdom over time. These examples provide comfort to people who feel misunderstood or opposed for their faith commitments.

Saint Joan of Arc: Condemnation and Vindication

Joan of Arc stands as perhaps the most famous example of the Church opposing someone who would later be recognized as a saint. Born in 1412 in Domrémy, France, Joan claimed to receive messages from Saint Michael the Archangel, Saint Catherine of Alexandria, and Saint Margaret of Antioch. Her voices told her to help the French king Charles VII fight the English in the Hundred Years War. Joan joined the French army and helped win several important battles, which amazed people around her. She was eventually captured by English forces and handed over to the Church for trial. On May 30, 1431, Joan was burned at the stake in Rouen, France, condemned as a heretic by Bishop Pierre Cauchon and other Church officials. The charges against her included wearing men’s clothing and claiming to hear voices from saints. At the time, Church authorities worried that Joan’s claims might be from the devil rather than from God. The trial records show that Joan was questioned intensely and that the Church proceeded with great caution, though the outcome was a tragic injustice. After her death, opinion about Joan gradually changed among Church leaders and the French people. Pope Callixtus III ordered a retrial of Joan’s case in 1456, less than twenty-five years after her execution. The retrial concluded that Joan had been wrongly condemned and that her trial was full of irregularities and bias. This official reversal showed that the Church recognized its earlier judgment was mistaken. Joan was beatified in 1909 and canonized as a saint in 1920 by Pope Benedict XV. Her feast day is celebrated on May 30, the anniversary of her death. The Church now honors Joan as a martyr and holds her up as a model of courage and faith. Her canonization is one of the clearest examples of the Church correcting a grave error in judgment.

Saint Ignatius of Loyola: Investigation and Approval

Saint Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuit order, faced suspicion from Church authorities during his early spiritual work. Ignatius underwent his own spiritual conversion after being wounded in battle and spending months recovering while reading religious texts. During this period, he had powerful spiritual experiences that changed his life completely. He decided to devote himself entirely to God and spent time at a monastery learning about prayer and spiritual practice. Ignatius developed what became known as the Spiritual Exercises, a structured set of meditations and prayers designed to help people discern God’s will in their lives. When Ignatius began sharing his methods with others, some Church officials became concerned about his approach. The Spanish Inquisition investigated Ignatius more than once because certain aspects of his spiritual practice seemed unusual to Church authorities at that time. Some officials worried that his methods of prayer and discernment might be leading people away from traditional Church teaching. Ignatius cooperated fully with these investigations and was able to explain his methods clearly. The Church eventually approved his Spiritual Exercises and recognized them as a legitimate and valuable tool for spiritual development. Ignatius founded the Society of Jesus in 1540 with papal approval, and the Jesuit order became one of the most influential religious communities in the Church. The Spiritual Exercises remain widely used today by Catholics and other Christians seeking to grow closer to God. Ignatius was canonized in 1622, and his feast day is celebrated on July 31. His case shows how the Church’s initial caution, though sometimes frustrating, eventually gave way to full approval and recognition.

Saint Thérèse of Lisieux: Early Skepticism and Later Recognition

Saint Thérèse of Lisieux, also known as Saint Thérèse of the Child Jesus, faced some skepticism during her lifetime and immediately after her death. She was born in 1873 and entered a Carmelite convent at the very young age of fifteen. Thérèse had a simple approach to spirituality that she called the “little way,” which emphasized doing small things with great love rather than performing grand works. During her years in the convent, Thérèse’s spiritual approach did not receive much attention from Church authorities or the wider Catholic world. Some religious leaders of her time thought her way was too simple or not rigorous enough compared to the spiritual methods of other saints. Thérèse lived a hidden life within her convent walls, largely unknown to the broader Church. She died in 1897 at the age of twenty-four from tuberculosis, having spent only about ten years in religious life. After her death, her spiritual writings and letters were published by her convent community. The publication of her writings sparked growing interest in her spiritual wisdom. Catholics began to recognize the depth and beauty of her simple approach to loving God. Pope Pius XI canonized Thérèse in 1925, less than thirty years after her death, which was remarkably quick for canonization at that time. In 1997, Pope John Paul II declared her a Doctor of the Church, an honor given to saints whose spiritual writings and teachings are particularly valuable for the whole Church. This recognition shows that what some had viewed as too simple turned out to be genuinely profound. Thérèse’s life and writings now influence millions of Catholics worldwide in their spiritual practice.

The Long Road to Recognition for Some Saints

Many saints experienced opposition or dismissal during their lifetimes that only later gave way to recognition of their holiness. Saint Francis of Assisi was viewed with suspicion by some Church leaders who questioned whether his radical approach to poverty and simplicity was wise. Pope Innocent III eventually approved Francis’s way of life and his religious order, which grew to become one of the largest in the Church. Saint Catherine of Siena was a Dominican lay woman who involved herself in Church politics and attempted to influence popes, which some found troubling at the time. Catherine wrote extensively about spiritual matters and offered counsel to bishops and cardinals. She was canonized in 1461, nearly a hundred years after her death, and is now recognized as a Doctor of the Church. Saint John of the Cross was a Spanish mystic and poet who was imprisoned by his own religious superiors because they misunderstood his spiritual teachings. He later escaped prison and was vindicated by Church authorities who recognized the orthodoxy of his teachings. Saint Teresa of Avila was investigated by the Spanish Inquisition because her writings about mystical prayer seemed unusual to some officials. The Inquisition eventually cleared her of any heresy, and the Church recognized her as a great spiritual teacher. Saint Maximilian Kolbe was executed by the Nazis in a concentration camp during World War II. Some Church leaders initially were slow to recognize his heroic virtue, but he was eventually canonized in 1982. These examples show a pattern of the Church eventually recognizing holiness even when initial responses were cautious or negative. The passage of time often brings greater understanding and wisdom about people’s true spiritual character. Modern Catholics can take comfort in knowing that the Church, while sometimes slow, does ultimately seek to honor those who truly serve God faithfully.

Why the Church Exercises Caution in Recognizing Saints

The Catholic Church teaches that discerning genuine holiness requires careful judgment and testing over time. The Church’s caution comes from the teaching in 1 John 4:1, which tells believers to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God.” Throughout Christian history, the Church has encountered false prophets and misleading spiritual teachers who claimed to speak for God. The Church’s responsibility includes protecting the faithful from spiritual harm caused by false teachings or manipulated experiences. Before canonizing someone as a saint, the Church investigates the person’s life, writings, and spiritual teachings thoroughly. The canonization process involves multiple stages of review by trained theologians and officials. The Church requires evidence of miracles attributed to the saint’s intercession before canonization can occur. This requirement ensures that the Church has concrete reasons to believe the person is truly in heaven and able to intercede for others. The investigation process can take many years or even centuries because careful study takes time. Church officials must consider the historical context in which a person lived and worked. The Church must also evaluate whether a person’s teachings and life were truly consistent with Catholic faith and practice. When the Church has opposed someone during their lifetime, it has generally done so based on the information available at that time. Errors in judgment occur because people are working with limited information or based on misunderstandings that later become clear. The Church’s eventual recognition of error shows that the institution values truth above defending past decisions. This willingness to correct course demonstrates genuine commitment to holiness and accuracy.

Documentation and Retrial: Changing the Record

The Church has formal processes for reviewing cases where individuals were condemned or opposed but later came to be understood differently. In Joan of Arc’s case, the retrial ordered by Pope Callixtus III allowed the Church to examine the original trial proceedings. The retrial found that Joan’s original judges had failed to follow proper procedures and had allowed bias to influence their decision. Documentary evidence from both trials still exists, allowing modern scholars to study how the Church addressed this miscarriage of justice. The existence of detailed records from both trials shows that the Church took the retrial seriously and wanted to get the truth on record. When the retrial concluded that Joan had been wrongly condemned, the Church did not hide this fact but made it publicly known. The official reversal of Joan’s condemnation was included in Church records and recognized as a correction to a serious error. For other saints who faced opposition, the Church has similarly allowed new evidence and better understanding to change earlier judgments. The process of studying and revising judgments about saints shows that the Church values accuracy and truth. When new information becomes available about a saint’s life or teachings, Church officials will reconsider earlier conclusions. The canonization investigations include reviewing all available historical sources to understand the person’s true character and holiness. Modern technology allows scholars to study historical documents more carefully than was possible in earlier centuries. This ongoing scholarly work sometimes leads to better understanding of why earlier officials made the judgments they did. The Church acknowledges that past leaders sometimes worked with incomplete information or cultural assumptions that later generations have questioned. By maintaining records and allowing retrials or new investigations, the Church demonstrates commitment to eventually getting things right.

Saints Who Faced Opposition from Church Leadership

Beyond the well-known examples of Joan of Arc and others, many saints throughout history faced various forms of church opposition or skepticism. Saint Jerome, one of the greatest biblical scholars in Church history, was criticized by some Church leaders during his lifetime for his bold theological positions. His translation of the Bible into Latin, called the Vulgate, was eventually accepted and became the standard Church translation for over a thousand years. Saint Athanasius was exiled multiple times by Church leaders who disagreed with his theological positions about Jesus Christ. He was eventually vindicated, and his teachings became the basis for orthodox Christian belief about the nature of Christ. Saint Cyril of Alexandria was initially condemned for his approach to explaining how Christ has two natures, but his teachings were later recognized as correct. Saint Augustine wrestled with Church leaders over various theological issues during his lifetime but is now recognized as one of the greatest saints and theologians. Saint Benedict established his monastic rule during a time when some questioned whether his approach was the best way to organize religious community. His rule became the foundation for monastic life throughout the Western Church and remains influential today. Saint Patrick worked in Ireland during a time when some Church leaders questioned whether the Irish should receive the same Christian teaching as other peoples. He was eventually recognized as the great apostle to Ireland and is celebrated worldwide. Saint Boniface faced opposition from various Church and political leaders in his mission to evangelize Germanic peoples. The Church eventually recognized his tremendous contributions to spreading Christianity in Northern Europe. Saint Thomas Aquinas faced suspicion from some Church officials who questioned his use of Aristotelian philosophy in theology. His works are now studied in seminaries worldwide and are considered foundational to Catholic theology. These examples show that opposition or skepticism from Church leaders did not prevent these individuals from being recognized as great saints.

The Role of Hindsight in Understanding Past Judgments

Looking back on cases where the Church opposed someone later recognized as a saint, it becomes clear that hindsight provides important perspective. In the case of Joan of Arc, Church officials of her time had to decide whether her voices came from God or from the devil based on limited information. The Church faced real pressure from political forces and had to weigh competing considerations in making its judgment. When we look at Joan’s life from our current time, it is much easier to see her holiness and the injustice of her condemnation. We have centuries of history showing that Joan’s cause led to French victory and that no lasting spiritual harm came from her influence. We can study her writings and reported sayings without the political and social pressures that influenced her original judges. The same applies to Saint Ignatius of Loyola’s case; Church authorities had genuine concerns about spiritual practices that were unfamiliar to them. We now have hundreds of years of evidence that the Spiritual Exercises have helped millions of people grow in their faith and discern God’s will correctly. The Church’s investigators did their job carefully, and they were eventually able to satisfy themselves that Ignatius’s methods were sound. For Saint Thérèse, the simplicity and hidden nature of her spiritual approach made it difficult for some to recognize its depth during her lifetime. After her death and the publication of her writings, the profound wisdom of her approach became clear to many Church leaders. The passage of time allowed the fruits of her spiritual approach to become evident in the lives of those who followed her teachings. In each case, the Church had reasons for its caution that were understandable given the circumstances. However, the Church also showed itself willing to admit when those reasons proved insufficient or when better understanding emerged. This pattern demonstrates that being cautious about new spiritual claims does not mean the Church is closed to recognizing genuine holiness. It shows instead that the Church takes both protection and justice seriously, sometimes requiring time to sort out complex situations correctly.

How the Church Determines Holiness Today

The modern canonization process used by the Catholic Church has become increasingly rigorous and careful over the centuries. The Church established formal procedures for studying candidates for sainthood to ensure thorough investigation. Today, the process typically begins with local Church authorities studying the life and writings of a deceased person. The Church requires evidence that the person lived a life of heroic virtue or died as a martyr. Theologians review the person’s writings and teachings to ensure they are consistent with Catholic faith. The Church investigates claims of miracles attributed to the person’s intercession, consulting medical experts to verify that healings cannot be explained by natural causes. The Vatican’s Dicastery for the Causes of Saints oversees the entire canonization process to ensure consistency and thoroughness. The process can take decades or even centuries, allowing for careful study and reflection. Pope John Paul II reformed the canonization process to make it more efficient while maintaining high standards. Even with these modern procedures, the Church remains cautious about claims of holiness. The Church understands that rushing to declare someone a saint could lead to mistakes similar to those made in the past. The process respects both the need for thorough investigation and the reality that determining holiness is a complex matter. Many candidates for canonization never advance beyond the initial local investigation. The Church has chosen to maintain high standards for canonization rather than making the process easier. This approach shows that the Church has learned from cases where it wrongly opposed individuals later recognized as saints. Rather than becoming lax about claims of holiness, the Church has become more careful and systematic in its approach. The modern process attempts to balance the need for evidence with respect for the spiritual wisdom that can only be recognized over time.

Saints Who Experienced Other Forms of Opposition

Beyond cases where the Church officially opposed someone, many saints faced personal opposition from other Catholics, Church leaders, or civil authorities that the Church later came to regret. Saint Paul experienced opposition from Peter and other Jewish Christians over questions about how to treat non-Jewish converts to Christianity. The Church eventually recognized that Paul was correct on these matters, though the conflict was real and significant at the time. Saint Dorothy faced opposition from pagan Roman authorities who tortured and killed her for her Christian faith. The Church did not support her cause in real time, but eventually recognized her as a martyr and saint. Saint Cecilia was persecuted by Roman authorities, and the early Church had limited ability to support her openly. She later became recognized as the patron saint of musicians and is honored throughout the Church. Saint Sebald worked in Northern Europe during a time when paganism remained strong and many opposed Christian missionary work. The Church eventually recognized the value of his work and the holiness of his life. Saint Ludmila of Bohemia was murdered for her Christian faith by those who opposed Christianity in her region. The Church came to recognize her as a martyr saint whose death testified to the power of faith. Saint Stephen was the first Christian martyr, killed by a mob led by Saul of Tarsus before Saul became Paul. The Church recognizes Stephen’s holiness and his death as a powerful testimony to faith. These saints did not experience direct opposition from the Church itself, but rather from forces hostile to Christianity. The Church’s later recognition of these individuals as saints shows that the Church values those who remained faithful even in the face of opposition. These examples demonstrate that the Church honors martyrs and those who suffered for their faith, even when the Church could not protect them during their lifetimes.

The Importance of the Church Acknowledging Its Errors

When the Church officially acknowledges past errors in opposing saints, it sends an important message about the nature of institutional growth and learning. The Church’s recognition that it wrongly condemned Joan of Arc demonstrates that the institution can admit fault without losing credibility. In fact, the honest acknowledgment of error strengthens the Church’s moral standing and makes clear that the Church values truth above defending past decisions. The Church does not hide the retrial of Joan’s case or the reversal of her condemnation but records these facts plainly in official documents. This transparency allows Catholics to understand that their Church is genuinely seeking truth rather than attempting to maintain a false image of infallibility. The Church teaches that while the pope has certain protections regarding matters of faith and morals, individual people in the Church remain fallible. The Church’s willingness to correct the record about Joan of Arc and others shows that this teaching applies in practice. When Pope John Paul II apologized for various historical wrongdoings committed by Church members and leaders, he demonstrated a commitment to honesty and justice. These apologies included recognition of historical mistakes and injustices that previous popes or Church leaders had not explicitly addressed. The acknowledgment of past errors helps the Church maintain moral credibility and shows that the institution takes its responsibility to truth seriously. Catholics can have confidence that their Church continues to examine its history and correct misunderstandings when evidence warrants it. This practice also serves as a reminder to current Church leaders about the importance of humility and careful judgment. When the Church acknowledges that it has opposed people who were actually saints, it warns current and future leaders to be cautious about opposing those whose holiness they do not fully understand. The public recognition of past errors makes clear that opposition to a new spiritual movement or teaching is not the same as wisdom or truth.

Why Initial Opposition Sometimes Occurred

Understanding why the Church opposed certain individuals who later became saints helps explain that the opposition often came from reasonable concerns rather than wickedness or malice. In Joan of Arc’s case, the judges who condemned her were genuinely concerned about distinguishing between divine messages and demonic deceptions. The Church has always taught that the devil can present himself as an angel of light to deceive people. Church leaders correctly understood that they needed to be extremely careful about validating claims of heavenly voices. The problem with Joan’s trial was not that the judges were wrong to investigate carefully, but that they allowed bias and political pressure to influence their judgment. In Ignatius of Loyola’s case, Church authorities were genuinely unfamiliar with his methods of spiritual discernment and prayer. The Spanish Inquisition had been established to combat heresy and false teachings, so investigating unusual spiritual practices was part of its proper role. The Inquisitors were not unreasonable in wanting to understand whether Ignatius’s methods aligned with Catholic teaching. When Ignatius was able to explain his approach clearly and the Church saw that it produced good spiritual fruit, the initial caution gave way to approval. For some saints, the opposition came from misunderstandings about their theological positions or their approach to religious life. Saint Thomas Aquinas initially faced criticism for using pagan philosophy to develop theological ideas. Church leaders worried that Aristotelian philosophy might lead him to contradict Christian truth. What Church leaders later realized was that Aquinas was using philosophical tools to explain and deepen understanding of Christian faith, not to change or undermine it. In many cases, the Church’s initial caution came from legitimate concerns expressed in ways that happened to be mistaken. This recognition shows that caution itself is not the problem; rather, caution must be paired with openness to being proven wrong. The Church has learned that dismissing unusual spiritual experiences or approaches without careful study can lead to tragic mistakes. This learning process has made the modern Church more careful about ensuring that investigation of new spiritual movements involves genuine openness and fairness.

The Relationship Between Suffering and Sainthood

Many of the saints whom the Church opposed or initially undervalued experienced significant suffering as a result of that opposition. Joan of Arc’s suffering and death at the stake became central to her canonization and recognition as a saint. The Church now understands that her willingness to suffer rather than recant her convictions about her spiritual experiences showed her authentic faith. Joan’s suffering did not prove her holiness, but it demonstrated a constancy and courage that were signs of genuine sanctity. Saint Ignatius of Loyola’s suffering through investigation by the Inquisition tested his faithfulness and commitment to his spiritual vision. He could have abandoned his methods to avoid suspicion, but instead he maintained his conviction that his approach was sound. This constancy despite pressure demonstrated the strength of his commitment to serving God and helping others. Many saints have experienced suffering at the hands of those who misunderstood or opposed them. The Catholic faith teaches that suffering, when borne with faith and love, can become a source of grace and holiness. Saints throughout history have found that their suffering drew them closer to Christ and deepened their trust in God. The Church recognizes that opposition and suffering do not automatically make someone a saint. However, the Church also recognizes that how a person responds to suffering and opposition can reveal much about their true spiritual character. When someone endures opposition with patience, humility, and faith, these qualities suggest genuine holiness. When someone responds to opposition with vindictiveness or despair, this suggests a weaker commitment to faith. The saints whom the Church opposed and later recognized demonstrated remarkable patience and faith even in the face of condemnation. Their example shows that true holiness includes the capacity to endure misunderstanding and injustice while maintaining trust in God. This teaching comforts modern Catholics who feel opposed or misunderstood for their faith convictions. The Church’s recognition that it has sometimes opposed the very holy teaches that being opposed does not mean one is wrong or lacking in holiness.

Cases of Partial or Gradual Recognition

Some saints experienced a gradual process of recognition rather than a sudden reversal of Church opposition. Saint Francis of Assisi’s case illustrates how even radical changes to religious practice can gradually gain acceptance. During Francis’s lifetime, some Church leaders questioned whether his insistence on living in poverty was wise or sustainable. Francis’s way of life seemed extreme compared to monastic practices that Church leaders understood and trusted. However, as Francis’s movement grew and his followers demonstrated genuine spiritual commitment and good works, Church leaders gradually recognized the value of his approach. Pope Innocent III eventually approved Francis’s rule and his religious order, though this approval came only after careful observation. After Francis’s death, his influence grew steadily, and the Church increasingly recognized the profound spiritual wisdom in his way of life. Today, Franciscanism is one of the largest and most respected traditions in the Catholic Church. Saint Catherine of Siena experienced a similar gradual process of recognition. During her lifetime, some Church leaders were troubled by her boldness in giving spiritual counsel to bishops and popes. She was a lay woman, not a priest or member of a religious order, yet she spoke with authority about spiritual and theological matters. The Church gradually came to recognize that her counsel was wise and that her spiritual experiences were genuine. After her death, the Church studied her writings and recognized their profound wisdom. Catherine was eventually canonized and declared a Doctor of the Church. These cases of gradual recognition show that the Church can change its mind without waiting for a dramatic retrial or reversal. The passage of time, observation of spiritual fruits, and study of a person’s teachings can all lead to growing recognition of holiness. The Church today understands that allowing time for recognition of holiness can be wise. Rushing to declare someone a saint without sufficient evidence would repeat mistakes of the past. However, the Church also understands that not rushing means accepting that recognition of a saint’s holiness might come only after their death. This balance between caution and justice is something the Church continues to navigate carefully.

The Impact of Historical Context and Understanding

The Church’s opposition to certain saints often reflected the historical circumstances, political pressures, and spiritual concerns of their time. Joan of Arc’s trial took place during the Hundred Years War between England and France. Church authorities faced pressure from English forces and their allies to condemn Joan. The political circumstances made it very difficult for Church judges to maintain objectivity. We can recognize that the judges were placed in an extraordinarily difficult situation without excusing the injustice of their verdict. Similarly, the Spanish Inquisition’s investigation of Ignatius of Loyola reflected the specific historical context of sixteenth-century Spain. The Inquisition was created to combat heresy and false teachings that the Church understood as threats to faith. The investigation of Ignatius came from the Inquisition’s legitimate role in protecting the faith, not from malice. However, the Inquisition also operated within a system that sometimes allowed bias and misunderstanding to lead to unjust conclusions. Understanding the historical context does not mean the Church’s actions were always right, but it helps us understand how the Church operated within its time. Modern Catholics can learn from these examples that all institutions, including the Church, must guard against allowing political pressure or historical circumstances to undermine justice and truth. The Church’s recognition that historical context explains some past mistakes also teaches that the Church should remain alert to how current historical circumstances might distort judgment. The Church today can ask whether current spiritual movements or teachings might be opposed due to prejudice or misunderstanding rather than genuine doctrinal concerns. This reflection on history helps the modern Church strive to be more fair and just in its judgments about new spiritual movements and teachings. The Church’s study of its own history shows that time and evidence are often needed to distinguish between genuine concerns and mere prejudice. This historical awareness has shaped the modern canonization process to be more careful about investigation while remaining more open to recognizing holiness that does not fit into familiar patterns.

Learning from the Past to Improve the Future

The Church’s recognition that it has sometimes wrongly opposed saints has led to changes in how the Church approaches new spiritual movements and claims of holiness today. The Church has become more systematic in its canonization process to ensure that investigation is thorough and fair. The reforms made by Pope John Paul II to the canonization process were motivated partly by the Church’s awareness of past mistakes. The modern process includes multiple stages of review by different experts to reduce the likelihood that bias or misunderstanding will lead to unjust conclusions. The Church now ensures that advocates for a candidate’s canonization and critics of the candidate are both heard carefully. This balanced approach helps the Church avoid dismissing genuine holiness simply because someone opposes it. The Church has also become more open to recognizing that holiness can take different forms than those familiar to Church leaders. Saints like Francis of Assisi and Teresa of Avila showed that radical spirituality could be authentic and valuable, even when it seemed unusual to many Church leaders. The modern Church is more likely to study carefully before dismissing new spiritual approaches as wrong. The Church now understands that some of its best saints have been those whose holiness did not fit neatly into familiar categories. This openness to diversity in how holiness appears has made the Church more humble about claiming to understand fully all the ways God works in human lives. The Church has learned that maintaining high standards for canonization does not require being closed to the recognition of genuine holiness. Instead, the Church can maintain high standards while remaining open to being surprised by the ways that God works in the world and in human hearts. This lesson from history helps the Church today approach future cases with both appropriate caution and genuine openness to truth.

Conclusion: The Church’s Ongoing Journey Toward Justice

The question of whether the Church has ever regretted opposing a saint has a clear answer that extends beyond mere intellectual acknowledgment. The Church has officially reversed its condemnation of Joan of Arc, recognized the error of investigators who opposed Ignatius of Loyola, and gradually come to recognize saints whose holiness seemed questionable during their lifetimes. These cases represent not failures of the Church’s faith or mission, but rather examples of how human beings working within institutions can sometimes make mistakes and can learn from those mistakes. The Church’s willingness to admit that it opposed people later recognized as saints shows that the institution values truth above maintaining a false appearance of infallibility. This honesty strengthens rather than weakens the Church’s moral authority and spiritual credibility. Catholics can have confidence that their Church is genuinely committed to recognizing authentic holiness and to correcting errors when evidence warrants. The Church’s recognition of past mistakes does not lead to paralysis or endless second-guessing about current decisions. Instead, it leads to more careful procedures and processes designed to help the Church make better judgments going forward. The modern canonization process reflects the Church’s hard-earned wisdom about the importance of thorough investigation, fair hearing of different perspectives, and openness to being surprised by where holiness appears. The saints whom the Church opposed or initially undervalued now serve as powerful witnesses to God’s grace working in human lives despite misunderstanding and opposition. Their stories offer hope to modern Catholics who feel opposed or misunderstood for their faith. These saints’ lives demonstrate that authentic holiness can endure even when institutions fail to recognize it immediately. The Church today continues to benefit from reflecting on these historical examples and considering how to apply these lessons to its present work of recognizing and honoring the saints of God.