I'm pretty sure I'm going to get some opposition to this, but that's never stopped me before and does not stop me now. The word "hero" is thrown around way to lightly. Most who are being labled as "hero" are IMHO just folks going about their daily job - one most of us, for varying reasons, have decided are "too hard" or "too demanding" or "too dangerous" or "too ___" for the rest of us. Cops, firefighters, and military service members are the prime examples.
I don't doubt that society needs heroes today and is faced with a near-absolute desert of candidates. Because of that we elevate folks that do stuff we choose not to do/are afraid to do/know is essential but below our perceived social status.
The Medal of Honor is awarded
to the individual who, while as an active member of the Army, distinguishes himself or herself conspicuously, at the risk of his or her life above and beyond the call of duty, by courage and intrepidity. The act justifying award of the medal must be performed while fighting an enemy of the United States, or while involved in conflict with an opposing/foreign force or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in combat against an opposing military in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The act or acts of heroism must have required a risk of life and the individual have displayed personal bravery or self-sacrifice so extraordinary as to set the individual apart from his or her comrades.
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/armymedals/ss/moh_5.htmThe citation states "When Chinese Communist Forces viciously attacked friendly elements, Chaplain Kapaun calmly walked through withering enemy fire in order to provide comfort and medical aid to his comrades. When they found themselves surrounded by the enemy, the able-bodied men were ordered to evacuate. Chaplain Kapaun, fully aware of his certain capture, elected to stay behind with the wounded." His conduct meets the criteria noted above.
But then we have
Fellow captives said the chaplain's "most courageous acts followed in a prisoner of war camp, where Kapaun died in May 1951. They said he saved hundreds of soldiers' lives using faith and the skills honed on his family's farm near Pilsen," the newspaper reports.
The Eagle adds: "In the prison camp, he shaped roofing tin into cooking pots so prisoners could boil water, which prevented dysentery. He picked lice off sick prisoners. He stole food from his captors and shared it with his starving comrades.
"Most of all, Kapaun rallied all of them, as they starved during subzero temperatures, to stay alive."
- which seem to fall short of the criteria for award of the MOH. It's that "risk of life" part that seems to be missing.
Those, and other activities mentioned here
http://www.frkapaun.org/frkapaunbooklet.html seem to form the basis for the drive for beatification and eventual canonization. IIRC there are supposed to be miracles involved - need two (2) unless you are declared a martyr, in which case you need one that happened after being declared a martyr.. Have I missed the mentioning of the miracles he performed?
Don't get me wrong. Fr. Kapuan deserves recognition for what he did in the POW camp But what he did there does not rise to the level of MOH, and without the miracles he does not meet the criteria for saithood.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1916625/posts I have no theological dog in this hunt. From a theological standpoint I do not care if the Holy Roman Catholic Church declares this guy a saint or a pepperoni pizza. But from the social perspective, I am greatly concerned about the relaxing of standards for declaring someone a hero or a saint. If that trend continues, it's very likely I will be declared a hero for writing this and eligible for sainthood based on the miracles of 1) not being struck by hellfire and lightening as I wrote these words, and 2) my writing this not causing the Earth to stop spinning on its axis, let alone not causing the reversal of the directioon of rotation.
stay safe.
