# Why aren't all popes saints? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 29, 2010, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169 "2010-03-29T01:50:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![doubled](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@doubled](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doubled)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/1 "2010-03-29T01:50:34Z")
Maybe wikipedia is wrong, but as far as I can tell, the definition of a saint is merely a recognition of the fact that this person is definitely, beyond a doubt, in heaven. Wikipedia is quite clear that the church doesn’t _make_ you a saint; it simply recognizes that you _are_ (and were, even before the recognition) a saint. Also according to wikipedia, the catholic church usually won’t officially recognize a person as a saint unless the person either A) died a martyr, or B) accomplished a miracle; but my understanding is those things aren’t strictly required to be a saint, they’re simply air-tight proof that you are a saint. The real requirement is just that you must beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt be in heaven. Have I got that correct? If so, then how come most popes aren’t saints? A few are – see this list. But most aren’t. > **[List of popes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes)** > > This chronological list of popes corresponds to that given in the Annuario Pontificio under the heading "I Sommi Pontefici Romani" (The Roman Supreme Pontiffs), excluding those that are explicitly indicated as antipopes. Published every year by the Roman Curia, the Annuario Pontificio no longer identifies popes by regnal number, stating that it is impossible to decide which pope represented the legitimate succession at various times. The 2001 edition of the Annuario Pontificio introduced "almo... But if the catholic church doesn’t believe that every single pope is beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt definitely in heaven, then WTF? If there’s any kind of doubt on that point, then why would the church be willing to accept the pope as the supreme arbitor of all religious matters while he’s still alive? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/2 "2010-03-29T02:38:57Z")
What makes you think that the Church does believe they’re all in Heaven? A pope is not required to be a good man, he just needs to be chosen by the consensus of the college of cardinals. The only claim the Church makes concerning the Popes is that a Pope will never make an incorrect pronouncement concerning faith or morals, and it’s taken on faith that God’s in charge of making that so. And in fact, in practice, even the popes who were absolute bastards (in some cases literally: There was a time when hereditary papacy was the norm), while they ran amok themselves, they never officially said that what they were doing was right. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/3 "2010-03-29T03:49:46Z")
The Vatican acknowledges that there were some bad popes; not all were saintly (see here: [Was there once a female pope? - The Straight Dope](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/432/was-there-once-a-female-pope)). For that matter, you can be widely understood to have gone to Heaven, but that doesn’t mean you are automatically designated a saint back here on Earth. ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/4 "2010-03-29T03:55:35Z")
Like these guys, for instance? [10 Worst Popes of all Time.](http://www.oddee.com/item_96537.aspx) ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/5 "2010-03-29T03:57:20Z")
See for example the [Saeculum obscurum](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saeculum_obscurum), a period described as the nadir of the papacy in the 10th century (nicknamed the “Poronocracy” by some scholars). ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/6 "2010-03-29T06:10:53Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > a Pope will never make an incorrect pronouncement concerning faith or morals, Please correct, but my impression is that even then the Pope can make a, well, a non-definitive statement on this or any other subject, and that papal infallibility involves only 1) statements that reiterate something the Church has always taught, or 2) extremely special and rare pronouncements that define a new dogma (such as the dogma of the Assumption of Mary in the 50’s). ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim_r.mortiss/32/142_2.png) [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_R.Mortiss)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/7 "2010-03-29T06:21:08Z")
My understanding (based on many years of Catholic schooling) is that a Saint isn’t just a person who went to Heaven, but a person who has demonstrably caused a miracle (actually, \*two \*miracles) several years AFTER having died. Clearly, this is a person of extraordinary ability, not just your run-of-the-mill Heavenly Citizen…TRM ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/8 "2010-03-29T06:46:26Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > Like these guys, for instance? [10 Worst Popes of all Time.](http://www.oddee.com/item_96537.aspx) A Borgia a Saint? Maybe in the other place. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/9 "2010-03-29T07:16:39Z")
> [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](#): > > My understanding (based on many years of Catholic schooling) is that a Saint isn’t just a person who went to Heaven, but a person who has demonstrably caused a miracle (actually, \*two \*miracles) several years AFTER having died. Clearly, this is a person of extraordinary ability, not just your run-of-the-mill Heavenly Citizen…TRM Uh, no. Causing miracles after death is _proof_ that one is in heaven, because one cannot intercede before god unless one is in his presence. Saints are those who have won salvation, in Catholicism as in (most of) the rest of Christendom, but the Catholic church is particularly hung up on air-tight proof. Hence their attitude toward sacraments, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/10 "2010-03-29T10:38:16Z")
In Catholicism, one or more miracles are required before someone can be considered a [saint.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonization) Obligatory link to the QI clip on the [miracle of the herrings](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEN6Bcwh2_s). ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/11 "2010-03-29T10:45:14Z")
A Saint is also a person who is being set up as an example to others. There are a number of Popes who are great examples… of what not to do as either a priest, a ruler or merely a human being. ---
**Author:** ![ianzin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ed655f/32.png) [@ianzin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ianzin)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/12 "2010-03-29T15:10:05Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > Please correct, but my impression is that even then the Pope can make a, well, a non-definitive statement on this or any other subject, and that papal infallibility involves only 1) statements that reiterate something the Church has always taught, or 2) extremely special and rare pronouncements that define a new dogma (such as the dogma of the Assumption of Mary in the 50’s). Not quite. The doctrine of Papal Infallibility states that when the Pope is speaking _ex cathedra_ on fundamental doctrines of faith and morals, and when he asserts that the doctrine of Infallibility applies, then he is infallible in the sense that God will not allow him to err. He can make non-definitive and non-infallible statements all he likes. There is nothing in this doctrine about either of the conditions you list as (1) and (2). To answer the OP, the Church has several rules about either beatification or sainthood. One reason why not all Popes are Saints is that to be declared a Saint you have to have at least two ‘documented’ miracles in your name, and not all of them have. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/13 "2010-03-29T15:59:35Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > A Borgia a Saint? Maybe in the other place. [Actually…](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Borgia) Francis Borgia was never pope…he was one of Alexander VI’s great grandsons, the grandson of Alexander VI’s son Juan. He was a Duke who, after his wife died, abdicated in favor of his son and became a Jesuit, eventually becoming head of the order. By all accounts he was abstentious, humble, and chaste…very untypically Borgia. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/14 "2010-03-29T18:12:56Z")
> [@ianzin](#): > > Not quite. The doctrine of Papal Infallibility states that when the Pope is speaking _ex cathedra_ on fundamental doctrines of faith and morals, and when he asserts that the doctrine of Infallibility applies, then he is infallible in the sense that God will not allow him to err. > > He can make non-definitive and non-infallible statements all he likes. There is nothing in this doctrine about either of the conditions you list as (1) and (2). Actually, in your first paragraph you reworded exactly what I meant by (1) and (2). Thank you – I knew I didn’t have the exact language but I was pretty sure about what I meant. ---
**Author:** ![Textual\_Intercourse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Textual\_Intercourse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Textual_Intercourse)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/15 "2010-03-29T18:55:12Z")
After reading the posts here I became curious about how the Church determines what is and what is not a miracle. So off to Google I go and the first result is a Dope thread from 2003. Reading it now. I’ll report back with anything miraculous. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/16 "2010-03-29T20:05:13Z")
> [@Nametag](#): > > Uh, no. Causing miracles after death is _proof_ that one is in heaven, because one cannot intercede before god unless one is in his presence. Saints are those who have won salvation, in Catholicism as in (most of) the rest of Christendom, but the Catholic church is particularly hung up on air-tight proof. Hence their attitude toward sacraments, etc. This is probably well worth reiterating. AFAIK, the Catholic Church makes no individual claims as to who is or is not a saint, just the definition one that anyone who died in a state of grace is _ipso facto_ a saint. However, it grants formal recognition, termed _canonization_, to those who can be proven to (a) have died for the faith (martyrs) or (b) have provided evidence that three miracles (reduced to two under circumstances I am not clear about) were granted in response to their intercession as requested in prayers to them. (Obviously, this is a statement of their policy and beliefs, not an assertion of objective fact.) Some people distinguish between canonized Saints and all the faithful saints in heaven by the use of capitalization, as exemplified in the main clause of this statement. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/17 "2010-03-29T21:56:48Z")
> [@](#): > > AFAIK, the Catholic Church makes no individual claims as to who is or is not a saint, just the definition one that anyone who died in a state of grace is ipso facto a saint. Isn’t every canonization an individual claim that that person is a saint? You’re correct, though, that the Church does not teach that any (dead) individual is not a saint: It’s considered within the realm of possibility that Judas, Nero, and Hitler are all in Heaven. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/18 "2010-03-29T22:05:51Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > [Actually…](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Borgia) Francis Borgia was never pope…he was one of Alexander VI’s great grandsons, the grandson of Alexander VI’s son Juan. He was a Duke who, after his wife died, abdicated in favor of his son and became a Jesuit, eventually becoming head of the order. By all accounts he was abstentious, humble, and chaste…very untypically Borgia. I think it was Alexander I was referring to. Cesere’s father. He was Pope, and an evil one at that. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/19 "2010-03-29T22:07:23Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Isn’t every canonization an individual claim that that person is a saint? You’re correct, though, that the Church does not teach that any (dead) individual is not a saint: It’s considered within the realm of possibility that Judas, Nero, and Hitler are all in Heaven. True – change my “is or is not” to just “is not”, or add an “other than” in somewhere to address the canonization process. :o ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2010, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169/20 "2010-03-29T22:27:15Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > I think it was Alexander I was referring to. Cesere’s father. He was Pope, and an evil one at that. Alexander was a pretty bad pope, and a pretty bad guy. He was a pretty big patron of the arts, though. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-all-popes-saints/534169.md?page=2)