The canonization of Mary MacKillop is an event that all Australians can celebrate. Not just Catholics. Men and women of every faith and none can rejoice in the life of this extraordinary Australian.

Mary MacKillop: The enduring values of hope and courage.

A canonization is not the religious equivalent of winning an Olympic Gold Medal, although many, including some Catholics, speak as if it is. In an age of individualism, it is perhaps difficult to understand that Mary was motivated by a profound commitment to community and the common good.

Over the past few weeks, many claims have been made on Mary. She was a feminist before her time. She was a rebel against a clerical church. She was a pioneering social worker. She even has been claimed as a model for the independents in the Federal Parliament!

Mary MacKillop was a gifted woman, a strong-willed and determined leader, a builder of schools, homes for the poor, and congregations. But she was more than all these characterizations.

Her long-running disputes with various Bishops have been well rehearsed in recent weeks. It was real and painful for her, but she was no rebel. She always accepted the authority of the church hierarchy, praying constantly that the work of her sisters would be able to prosper.

Her prayerful perseverance was rewarded, as previous decisions were reversed, including her ex-communication. At her passing, Archbishop Moran observed: “Today I believe I have assisted at the death bed of a Saint.”

Mary was an immensely practical woman. Her sisters, young women in their late teens and twenties, left the cities for the hardship of small towns and rural communities. Preparing them for the task was uppermost in Mary’s mind. They “must be trained spiritually and in the worldly knowledge necessary to enable them to take the stand the Church in Australia requires of them.”

The work not only included teaching in the schools she founded, and caring for the poor and homeless, but begging when necessary for the funds to live on. Her practical Christianity attracted support from Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

While motivated by faith, she was also a woman of the world. When women gained the right to vote, and to be elected to Parliament, she encouraged her congregation to participate.

“It is the duty of all of us to vote,” she wrote to her sisters in 1903. “Find out who are the members proposed for election and vote for those who are considered most friendly to the Church and to Religion. Every so called Catholic is not the best man.”

We can learn from Mary MacKillop that clear vision, perseverance and determination will overcome obstacles. But most of all, we learn that faith is not a relic.

To claim Mary for some current political cause is to miss the essential meaning of her life. She was motivated through her love of Christ to bring about a better future for hundreds of thousands of Australians.

In an era that often seems besotted by vice, she reminds us that hope and courage are enduring virtues.

In 50 years, the small school she founded in 1866 at Penola with Fr Julian Woods had grown to 106 houses, 12 institutions sheltering over 1,000 people at a time, and 117 schools with more than 12,000 pupils.

Her life was an exemplar of the call ‘to love one another as I have loved you.’

A few weeks before her death in 1909, having previously suffered a stroke, Mary wrote: “Whatever troubles may be before you, accept them cheerfully, remembering whom you are trying to follow. Do not be afraid. Love one another, bear with one another, and let charity guide you in all your life.”

It is a fitting epitaph – and a worthy commendation for us all.

134 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • stephen says:

      04:36pm | 16/10/10

      There was an article in The Australian today about this lady, and why it took so long for recognition of her services to be recognized by the Catholic Church.
      I think this Church has some explaining to do.
      Again.

    • acotrel says:

      04:42pm | 18/10/10

      I have no interest in religion.  However I believe there is an amount of hypocrisy involved in Mary McKillop’s canonisation.  As I understand it she was a person who ‘walked the talk’, and when she spoke out about a crime against children, was punished.  Others could do well to think long and hard on her example!

    • Joe says:

      05:40pm | 18/10/10

      Mary of the Cross has been VERY recognised by the Catholic church for over 100 years. Its just the final sainthood that has taken a little while. The Catholic church has been around for 2000 years and isn’t in any hurry. It takes time to thoroughly investigate someone’s life. I also hope that Mary’s services are now recognised by more Australians.

    • Gregg says:

      06:38pm | 16/10/10

      I can imagine that Mary would have been a fine woman, strong to her faith and doing her utmost to help those in need, just like many women in many faiths and services.
      I was also just asked what are the miracles that get performed that make somebody a Saint and for that I have no answer for whilst there can be at times some wonderful things occurring like rescuing people from a mine or from all sorts of catastrophies and some may seem miraculous they are often more a combination of good luck and application of resources in a planned manner.
      Personally, I would think that the Catholic Church may just love the declaration of a few Sainthoods every so often just like a politician will play up a good news story and try to hide the bad stuff and all religions have some bad stuff.
      As for Australians, if people of the Catholic Faith want to do whatever they like to acknowledge Mary’s cannonisation, that’s fine but it is a particular religion and why the hell the Australian government needs to be wasting more taxpayers money in sending an ex PM and all the hanger ons there is beyond me and would also seem a ploy by our now Atheist PM to win some religious minds.

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      09:14am | 17/10/10

      Gregg says:06:38pm;” why the hell the Australian government needs to be wasting more taxpayers money in sending an ex PM and all the hanger ons there is beyond me and would also seem a ploy by our now Atheist PM to win some religious minds.”

      That’s right it’s all Julia’s fault…. dribble dribble snivel snivel…. they should have sent the opposition instead bleat bleat…

    • MK says:

      09:24am | 17/10/10

      Yes why indeed would the government be sending the foreign minister to open up a foreign embassy, in a forgien state, Thats completely ridiculous!

    • maria says:

      11:10pm | 17/10/10

      it’s not about “why the hell ....”
      The Catholic Church has done great things for this country—- don’t be so blind about the good works of the missionaries… many benefits from St Vincent’s de Paul society, the Catholic charities and so on… The canonisation is a formal acknowledgement of the miracles, the supernatural…

    • Gregg says:

      01:08am | 18/10/10

      @ Rob,
      The government already had appointed Tim Fischer as ambassador to the Holy See, again WTH for who knows , so no need to have paid for anyone to go.

      @ maria,
      All denominations no doubt do some good things just as some have done some bad things, covering up of bad things amongst them.
      Let the Catholic Church do whatever it wants that is legal and all churches have their people accountable to the one law of the land.
      Getting someone cannonised is nothing whatsoever to do with government here and can be handled by the Vatican.

    • teresita1897 says:

      10:52pm | 18/10/10

      “As for Australians, if people of the Catholic Faith want to do whatever they like to acknowledge Mary’s cannonisation, that’s fine but it is a particular religion and why the hell the Australian government needs to be wasting more taxpayers money in sending an ex PM and all the hanger ons there is beyond me and would also seem a ploy by our now Atheist PM to win some religious minds.”

      This is a significant event for Australia…that’s why the Australian Government sent representatives. Whether Catholic or not, Mary’s contribution to this country has greatly impacted on all Australians. And they were honouring a great Australian. So it’s only fitting to have government representatives there.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      07:01pm | 16/10/10

      Mary MacKillop was a great Australian with a heart of gold . She gave all of herself to her work in education , caring for the poor and needy and generally being a champion of the common good of all Australians.
      There can be no doubt that this lady had a gift of abilities which would seem to be beyond the average .  Mary devoted her lifetime and those abilities to the care and welfare of all within and beyond her radius as a Nun in a Christian Order.  Mary MacKillop was a woman of Australian pioneering spirit and her Church’s recognition of her wondrous achievements by canonization is something we can all be proud of.
      Though i am not a Catholic by faith , i am deeply affected by the achievements of this extraordinary person. What was the motivation behind this lady’s devotion to her life’s work .  We would have to look deeply into her love of Christ and committment to God for the answer . Her unique ability to touch the lives of all who knew or came in contact with her could only have been a very special gift .

    • Russ says:

      07:51pm | 16/10/10

      For all the good she did in her life, she is now finally recognised for… Post-mortem treatment of cancer! That is what makes her canonisation difficult for non-believers to celebrate.

    • PaulB says:

      08:52am | 18/10/10

      It does interest me that the media noise surrounding this infantile event is focusing on her actual achievements in life, rather than the supernatural rubbish that this is really about.  A medal of honour of some description could achieve the same ends, but “Sainthood” is not about life achievement it is about one’s future career as a Night-Nurse of the fifth dimension.

    • Steely Dan says:

      09:34am | 18/10/10

      Excellent point, Russ.  Canonisation seems to be proof that for Catholics, being a good person isn’t as important as being a vessel for divine magic - which flies in the face of the colloquial meaning of sainthood, where superpowers are irrelevant, and selflessness is the real virtue. 

      ‘Elevating’ Mary Mackillop to sainthood takes the focus off the good works we know she performed and onto the magical good works the Vatican believe she performed.  I am honestly not trying to offend Catholics here, but to me, this is like remembering Martin Luther King Jr for his role in keeping the Alpha Centaurian hordes at bay during the Great Battle of Saturn.

    • teresita1897 says:

      11:00pm | 18/10/10

      @Steely Dan: Canonisation does not take the emphasis off the good works she did. Basically, if someone has lead a very good and virtuous life, the Vatican will open up an investigation into that person’s life to find out if their goodness was consistent and heroic. If that is found to be true, they are declared “Servant of God” and then “Venerable”.
      What they are trying to find out is whether or not this person has attained Heaven, and if so, is the life they led and the things they did worthy of being held up to the Church as a model for imitation. And if they are in Heaven, they can pray for us and our needs.
      The miracles required in the processes of Beatification and Canonisation are basically the Church asking God for evidence that she is indeed in Heaven. It is pretty much asking God for His seal of approval. She doesn’t perform the miracle - God does. She just prays for it, thereby proving that she is before God and that she can pray for us.
      I hope this helps to clarify the canonisation process.

    • Steely Dan says:

      11:22am | 19/10/10

      I’m not confused by the process, teresita1897.  I just object to the fact that the alleged miracle (and the promise of more to come) is what is being celebrated, not her good works.  You can do good work all your life and not be eligible to enter heaven.  The canonisation process has little if anything to do with what she achieved during her life.

    • xyz says:

      11:43am | 19/10/10

      teresita1897, thanks for the nice fairy story… I can’t believe in 2010 that educated people are still actually conned by this spin. It’s nothing but a targetted marketing exercise by the RC church. They also made the first Canadian saint (along with a Polish, Spanish, and two Italian saints)... coincidence much???

    • John says:

      08:09pm | 16/10/10

      But we are not celebrating the great things she did for people are we? That’s not why she is getting canonised. She is getting canonised because of the superstitious belief that praying to this dead woman can perform magic and cure people. How is this any different to the medicine man doing his rain dance in the middle of africa?

    • teresita1897 says:

      11:01pm | 18/10/10

      Please see my reply to Steely Dan above, I hope it helps to clarify.

    • David says:

      08:29pm | 16/10/10

      I’m a born and raised Catholic, but I can’t help but think that canonisation is arrant nonsense; about as far removed from Jesus’ message as one could possibly get.  It’s up there with the meaningless idolisation that is the veneration of the cross.  What ever happened to the simple message of love one another as I have loved you?

    • Al says:

      12:51pm | 18/10/10

      I agree (but am not catholic) but I still wonder how the Catholic faith can emphasise the cross, altar, communion and still claim to not be reaking one of the commandments, that being “Thou shall not worship GRAVEN IMAGES”.
      Wow, and ALL those portraits, statues, crosses and altars are ALL ‘graven images’

    • Gonzo says:

      08:00pm | 18/10/10

      Al, nobody is worshipping them. They are used just like the photos of your loved ones that you have in your living room - and that you don’t worship.

      Saints are asked to INTERCEDE before God for your petitions, but they are not asked to CONCEDE those petitions themselves.

    • xyz says:

      10:40pm | 18/10/10

      Gonzo, why does the Roman Catholic God need to be petitioned via a middleman? Surely it would be better to petition directly.

    • Louisa says:

      08:39pm | 16/10/10

      A good lady indeed - but she did not perform any miracles.

      In this day and age perhaps being awarded some type of Australian Award would be more appropriate.

    • Mark says:

      08:50pm | 16/10/10

      It’s not as simple as that - her canonisation is a direct result of the apparent “miracles” credited towards her. And I can’t accept that. Cancer can (and does) go into spontaneous remission. It’s a well documented (but rare) medical fact, and spontaneous remission has occurred in believers of all faiths AND atheists. It’s just that Atheists don’t run around crediting their cure to a deity or supernatural spirit. We don’t know exactly how the cancer can go into remission, but it is known that our immune system can fight against cancer. Just because two people claim to be healed by praying to someone who is already dead, doesn’t mean anything at all - two people is hardly a large sample.

      In the old days, whenever someone survived from any disease, God was always credited. Then we learned about the immune system and how some people’s bodies can fight infection themselves. I suspect that in a few years or decades, we will find out that no miracles occurred here at all.

      There’s no proof that the prayer worked - people believe just because they want to, and how is that logical? You’ve got no proof that this Saint Mary did anything (I find it very hard to believe she did anything, due to the fact that she’s, ya know, dead).

      Let’s put it to a test - get 50 or so people who are dying from cancer, or have “terminal” cancer. Get 25 of them to pray to this Mary, and get 25 to not pray at all. Then compare survival rates. If you’re so sure God’s up there, saving people, then you should obviously expect to see an effect, right?

      Oh that’s right - you’re going to say “God works in mysterious ways” even when Christians with Cancer die. Guess Mary wasn’t around for them, huh?

    • G. David says:

      08:17am | 17/10/10

      I think what they are saying is that a miracle is a very rare event. In other words, every now and then God makes an exception.

      Your proposed test would only falsify miracles if the church was holding out that if believers get the formula right and pray the correct prayer to the correct person they will get a miracle on demand like some kind of cosmic dial-a-miracle service, which is not what any mainstream denomination teaches.

    • Reg says:

      02:34pm | 18/10/10

      G David, I think canonization is a declaration that the person was sooooo good that they would have gone straight to heaven and are therefore in a perfect position to intercede directly with God on behalf of anyone who asks then to.  Thus we have prayers to ALL SAINTS and if that doesn’t work, you’re screwed mate. It’s at times like this we resort to the exclamation, “what the f*** did I do wrong?” 

      Next week the origin of the term, “unUstrayn.”

    • jared says:

      08:50pm | 16/10/10

      She is a saint not because she was an extraordinary human being who did great works of charity while she was alive. but because the church says she has cured cancer…... after she died ...... over one hundred years after she died.
      seriously why do we spend so much on cancer research when all that time and effort would be much better spent praying to a woman who died over a century ago. the results speak selves.

    • taiabada says:

      08:59pm | 16/10/10

      I just wish Sky would go back to broadcasting some news   I’ve heard all they have to say over the past 2-3 weeks, over and over again, and I certainly won’t be watching their broadcast tomorrow.  Presumably Rupert wants another knighthood - but he’s probably too old to need one any more.

    • Jim says:

      09:45pm | 16/10/10

      It’s is an achievement that needs to be recognised however the church’s basis of recognition is somewhat off putting.

      We need to understand it’s “HER” Good works and Contributions that should have her earn the title as a saint. Unfortunately the Catholic church focuses on Miracles, by people praying under her name and something happening out of the ordinary.

      I’m sorry, yes Miracles are great, but it’s her contribution to making a difference that means so much more to me, and that won’t change regardless of whether she’s a saint or not.

      Strange the catholic church can canonise saints, when clearly the Bible says all believers of Christ are “Saints”.

      But as with all Great outcomes coming out of Religious hero’s, Atheists are hidden away picking their battles.

      Congrats Mary MacKillop, thank you for your Great works.

    • David says:

      10:31pm | 16/10/10

      I do not celebrate her canonisation as a Saint. To award and proclaim her a supernatural force for selective medical cures devalues her actual achievments and activities by contaminating her memory with taudry miracles. What is worse is the manner of the media in its reporting of these miracles, lacking completely in any rational skepticism of which is the hallmark of a well functioning media.

      This woman deserves celebration, rememberance and respect for what she achieved. Australian’s don’t need the Vatican to tell us who or how to honour the heroes of our society.

    • Reg says:

      09:48am | 18/10/10

      Well put David. She was obviously a good woman with fine goals motivated by who knows what. I am sure there are lots of men and women in society who have done as well without being proclaimed heroes.  Lost in the gulags and the concentration camps and in the jungles, while this lady was fortunate indeed to have been in the eye of the authorities who seek such things.

      That her elevation has been “fast-tracked"should not be dismissed lightly. “The Church” is in need of the good publicity.

    • No longer catholic says:

      12:10am | 17/10/10

      After just a short stint at the hands of cruel and brutal, crucifix wielding nuns at an Adelaide catholic school, ask me or my older brother what one should do with dead nuns. We may not have been angels and believe in fair punishment, but people are jailed for far less than those witches did to us and other male and female students.

    • Father Ted says:

      06:08am | 17/10/10

      What has your alleged treatment at school got to do with Mary MacKillop? Nuns are individuals and human beings like all of the rest of us, some noble and good, some bitter and vindictive. Which are you?

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      09:10am | 17/10/10

      This is just a PR campaign for a church and it’s head the Pope that is dying in a quadmire that sickens all who are not apart of it. I wonder how many others knelt beside her tomb and prayed for a cure then died without their prayers being answered. Odds are out of the possible thousands over the years one or two get anwered and all of a sudden the women is a saint!!! give me a break what a load of rubbish. Yes it sounds like she went around and did a lot of good… but so is Bill Gates now giving away billions. Like I siad above this is just a PR campaign by a dying church and theology to promote membership… and people will be sucked in by it.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      07:59pm | 17/10/10

      Rob r Charteris :  I note you specifically attack Christianity and especially the Catholic Faith.
      Can you explain why you do not attack other faiths such as Islam or Hindu or Budhism. ?  Don’t misunderstand me please , i not suggesting that you attack those religions , but why specifically Christianity. ?
      I can understand that you would abhor the low percentage bad apple element which is found in *every * barrel , just like everyone else , but i find it hard to accept a blanket cover abhorrence for all Christians.
      Please explain.
      I suggest to you that you do so because it is fashionable for so called athiests , to attack or mock Christians.

    • Steely Dan says:

      09:40am | 18/10/10

      @ Wayne

      “Can you explain why you do not attack other faiths such as Islam or Hindu or Budhism. ?”
      Could it be that the topic of conversation is closely related to Catholicism, a Christian denomination?

    • Reg says:

      10:02am | 18/10/10

      Hahaha give him time. He’ll catch on. But let us not forget that Wayne is trying to resuscitate his image with his effusive outpourings.

      God bless ‘im.

    • Al says:

      01:35pm | 18/10/10

      I take offense at you using the word ‘witches’ to describe the nuns.

      Besides the fact that the bible states ‘thou shall not suffer a witch to live’, a witch is simply a non-believer who utillises unapproved methods to treat people (i.e. A herbalist) NOT a cruel and nasty woman who uses her supposed belief to justify hurting children.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      12:53am | 17/10/10

      If the Catholic Mafia say so…..

    • raised a catholic says:

      06:29am | 17/10/10

      We can all celebrate Mary MacKillop’s canonisation .. please don’t.

      According to the bible saints are those following the Commandments and Jesus (rev 14:12). According to common usage a saint is a good person. According to the Catholics a saint is one because they say so.

      Are there still people believing anything at all the Catholic church tells us?

    • Malcolm Davey says:

      05:57pm | 17/10/10

      Well - to be a bit more literal - a saint is a holy person, and in the New Testament, all Christians are called saints.
      Your point isn’t really affected.

    • raised a catholic says:

      10:04pm | 17/10/10

      The point is, Who do you want to follow? The bible or the Catholic Church? Or the common usage of the word saint?

      The Catholic Church presents themselves as the authority. According to scripture it is not up to the Catholic church to decide who is holy.

      According to scripture, any one who follows the Commandments and Jesus is a saint.

      Not everyone is aware of that. No biggie either, just an observation.

    • Steely Dan says:

      09:41am | 18/10/10

      @ raised a catholic

      “Are there still people believing anything at all the Catholic church tells us?”
      More to the point, are there still people believing anything because the Bible tells them so?

    • Daryl says:

      03:06pm | 19/10/10

      raised a catholic - Please feel free to read my blog which provides an explantion of what Catholics actually believe regarding saints - and the Virgin Mary in particular.  Despite allegedly being raised Catholic you appear to have a very poor grasp of what that Church teaches.

      The Catholic Church agrees that all followers of Jesus are saints - but how can you know if the person next to you is really a Christian?

      Canonisation is merely stating that there is enough evidence to show that this person truly is a follower of Christ, and is now in heaven.  It is about saying to believers that this person is worthy of respect and their behaviour is worth emulating as a Christian - nothing more.

      You can read more at http://fewwords.weebly.com

    • cameron says:

      06:43am | 17/10/10

      Why should we celebrate ignorance? Why should we celebrate the elevation of lies and mythology? Why should we celebrate the appropriation of the memory a persons life to promote the church? This is a moment of sadness, a moment of the death of truth, not a moment to celebrate.

    • Andrew says:

      11:34am | 18/10/10

      Amen!  Let’s commemorate this day with a new national holiday “National stupidity day”.  Mary might have been a good person (we’ll never really know for sure, history has a way of distorting things), but she didn’t cure cancer, didn’t perform any other ‘miracles’, and anybody who prays to her has no more chance of being healed than if they prayed to Buddha, Ganesh, Mohammad, Darth Vader or me.  Every year, as science uncovers more about the world we live in, more an more ‘miracles’ are revealed as simply quirks of nature that have a very valid scientific explanation.  Unlikely, yes, but very possible.  Anybody who understands probability understands that something with a 1 in a million chance of happening is not unlikely - it’s certain.  The odds of winning lotto are 1 in 8,000,000, yet somebody wins almost every week.  The odds of being struck by lightning are also extremely small, yet it happens every day to some poor schmuck.  When an amputee wakes up one morning with their limb regrown, I’ll believe in miracles.  Or does god hate amputees?  What other reason could there be that lepers, people with cancer, etc are all cured, but the poor amputees - never!

    • cockie says:

      06:46am | 17/10/10

      Just what is a Saint?

      I only shave on St’s days, anyway; that is, the days of the week beginning with a S or a T.

    • Elphaba says:

      09:53am | 17/10/10

      Mackillop was obviously a wonderful person, but make no mistake - her canonisation is a publicity stunt by an organisation losing its grip on its flock.

      She’s not performing miracles, and she’s not curing cancer.  Whilst there are some that might attribute their survival to a divine hand, how about those that die and leave behind families because God is too busy to answer their prayers?

      She’s not a saint for all Australians, and I don’t celebrate her canonisation.  I’m not interested in anything the Catholic Church has to say - they’re an antiquated, corrupt, dangerous organisation set on driving us back to the Age of Unenlightenment.

    • Ross Corrigan says:

      10:36am | 17/10/10

      How about we create a posthumous AO or something similar so all those long dead but very worthy people who never got recognition while alive could be celebrated for their wonderful achievements because I honestly do not think I could stand much more of this nonsense about Mary MacKillop.  The sight of thousands of people taking part in mass delusionary behaviour scares the hell (no pun intended) out of me.

    • Wok says:

      10:46am | 17/10/10

      Had this canonisation occurred in a non-mainstream religion catholics and probably the majority of Australians would regard it as a loony cult activity.  Most Australians would quietly snigger at it and forget about it.  Why Gillard promised money to go towards this event is beyond belief.  Why the media are getting themselves tied in knots is ridiculous.  Why the Punch would accept articles from this man who showed absolutely no compassion or integrity in dealing with Dr. Haneef yet is off with the fairies with his “faith” is disappointing.

    • Mike T says:

      11:28am | 17/10/10

      SIgh…

      Cant beleive some of the posts on here!!!!

      I woman is recognised for giving her life to others and i i read is:

      *Debate around if she did or dint cure cancer
      *Punches against the catholic church due to misstreatment at the hands of Nuns (whilst this is unforgivable, is this really the right forum??)
      *Calls for the fact this is simply a publicity stunt…


      Honeslty people, see it for what it is…. a woman gave her life for others…regardless if you agree with her motivation or the organisation she was involved in, is it not something that we hould not all be happy about and embrace.

      I date a pom, but im starting to feel that they have nothing on us in the whinging department.

    • John says:

      05:36pm | 17/10/10

      Mike T you said “I woman is recognised for giving her life to others”
      No, she is NOT being recognised for this. If she was getting an award for the great work she did for THAT reason alone no-one would have a problem with this and we would be applauding.

      She is becoming a saint not because of the great work she did, but because some people claim that over a hundred years after her death she magically cured them of cancer. She’s basically getting an award for superstitious ignorance. There is NO merit in this and its just a PR campaign by the church.

    • Mike t says:

      10:21am | 18/10/10

      If you honestly think that this is the driving force for her being recognised then you need to give yourself an uppercut. I think we all know that saints are recognised for thier deeds…. the church must then look/discover (whatever you want to call it) miracles to meet the requirments.

      unfortunaltly, John, it is becomming the Australain way to put down others becasue you dont like thier politics, religion, beliefs etc… case in question, your first reaction base your argumenton the techincal nature of what constitues a saint….

      John, ALL modern day saints are generally people that have given thier life for the service of others…... that is the common thread….it’s just a bit sad that thats not your first interpretation.

      PS. Im not religious, before you get on your high horse…im just a person that believes if somone does good then you say so… i know a carzy thought

    • John says:

      11:32am | 18/10/10

      “If you honestly think that this is the driving force for her being recognised then you need to give yourself an uppercut”

      Well ask yourself this: If people had not come forward saying that she could magically cure them would she be getting a sainthood? No, she would not. That is the ONLY reason she is getting it. It sends the message that you can’t be worthy by being human and doing good work, but you have to invoke the supernatural.

    • TheRealDave says:

      11:39am | 18/10/10

      Mike, I hear what you are saying BUT you need to do a bit more reading and realise that the ONLY way the Catholic church makes saints is based on ‘miracles’ attributed to them AFTER they die. What they do in life is mostly irrelevant. Sure they need to ‘fit the profile’ but without documented and ‘investigated’ miracles then no amount of orphan saving or ‘bring souls to Jeabus’ is going to get you that gold ring above your portrait.

      And I say ‘investigated’ in its loosest form possible and bearing no actual resemblance to any kind of modern scientific or police investigation. Its more ‘the vibe’ :p

    • Mike T says:

      12:15pm | 18/10/10

      @ Real Dave & John….....

      Dont need to do any more reading on the issue… i think that i have mentioned that i agree 100% that a miracle must be shown before sainthood can be aforded (please read my last post it is very clear), both yourself and John need to get a grip…let me say it again “i agree that for sainthood to occur that a MIRACLE MUST BE SHOWN”

      I think the floor in both your’s and John argument is that you seem to think that becasue it is documented that it is what is required it is the driving force as to who it is awarded to….. in truth it is the actions of the person that qualifies them….if they have have given thier life to charity/others the church then sets out to find MIRACLES….. both yourself and john can argue all you like about what is written down, but if you cant see this is the way it works, then i repeat, “give yoursefl an uppercut”

      If the only drinving force is “the miracle” then why is the catholic church not investegating the validity of possible mirracles all over the world and handing out sainthoods????  The answer is they only look into the lives of those that have gone above and beyond…... so my point is the actions of the person IS the starting point….. the proving of miracles comes later and is often found without a lot of proof of occurance!!!

      Not sure if you guys have an axe to grind against the church or you just dont like seeing people recognised for good deeds but i find it sad that you feel the need to debate the semantics of what constitutes a sainthood….can you find me a person in the last 50 years that has been awarded this without being a person that has done wonders for the human race…. dosent it seem starnge to you that ALL of the people that have been awarded them are people that have done wonders for the human race…. Dont you find it odd that ALL of them satisfy this criteria…. maybe just maybe thats becasue it is a requirment, in fact it is THE requirment…

    • TheRealDave says:

      12:50pm | 18/10/10

      Mike, if simply being a good catholic and all that is enough to get her a gong WHY hasn’t she been honoured until now? Why did it take several ‘confirmed’ miracles before she could even get on the list? Surely her life’s body of work was more than enough - if what you are claiming is correct? Is that a ‘flaw’ in your response? What about other great Christians who don’t have miracles attributed to them? Are they to be forever forgotten until someone miraculously enters remission from cancer and who just happened to have prayed to some forgotten century long dead Christian?

      Sorry, we humble peasants don’t make the rules, the Catholic Church does. The rules state a number of confirmed miracles must be investigated and ‘proven’. When you reach the magic number *presto chango* you’re a saint. REGARDLESS of what you achieved in your life. Sorry, but roolz is roolz.

      You may want to watch those uppercuts, otherwise you’ll get another black eye wink

      And yes, I despise the Catholic Church and all it stands for - especially the hypocrisy of using Mary Mackillop in their PR campaign, the same Mary Mackillop they threw out after she exposed their corruption and ineptness.

    • Reg says:

      04:28pm | 18/10/10

      Come on Real Dave, leave the one-eyed business to Wayne. If the heirachy had stuck to the people who threw her out of the church unjustly, then they would have been equally despicable. They did not, they have once again identified that they have done great wrongs and admitted so publicly.

      From what I recall of my Catholic days, the really long period of investigation was to check all sorts of silly details that would have ruled out possible canonization. That and the time to allow people to pray to her and have her intercede with God who then performs the miracle or not. All eventualities are covered.  Not my rules just something that has been shorted this time, probably due to the world-wide-web. I recall that having polluted their body by SMOKING was sufficient to receive a great big NO. Don’t ask me to even think what might have happened had she not washed her hands after going to the toilet. But hang about, those poor innocent germs going down the gurgler to be consumed by bottom-feeders. That could be a worry.

    • John says:

      08:05pm | 18/10/10

      Mike T you claim that “in truth it is the actions of the person that qualifies them”

      To refute this I am going to ask you a very simple question:
      would Mary be a saint right now if people had not come forward saying that praying to her had somehow cured them of a disease?

      You have to say she would not be a saint now wouldn’t you? And there is your answer. She is a saint because of superstitious mumbo jumbo, not because of her work

    • Godwin says:

      11:38am | 17/10/10

      After all the good this lady has done, I can’t believe the Pope or someone, is now going to put her in a cannon,  as some sort of circus performer, to shoot her upwards, presumably nearer her God (to thee). Is this not eternal suffering?  But then, one must agree God’s son Jesus suffered at the hands of religious dogma. Oh well, it’s all harmless, and good luck to the good folk who have faith, they’re not killing each other. On ther other hand…....never mind.

    • Gregg says:

      08:21pm | 17/10/10

      Come on Godwin, wasn’t Malcolm good enough cannon fodder for you?

    • thatmosis says:

      12:03pm | 17/10/10

      What a load of unmitigated crap. She might have been an extraordinary woman but thats it. The church in its bid to get more dollars out of the believers will pull any stunt thats money worthy. What about people of different faiths or no faiths, why do we have to put up with this for one minute.

    • fairsfair says:

      10:56am | 18/10/10

      too true. Why is this example of religious extremism accepted and perpetuated by the media? What seperates all of this carry on and ritual from oh lets say, wearing something on your head to express/adhere to your faith?

      Thats right, when it involves Christianity (particularly catholocism) it is all ok and not scary in the slightest.

      I near choked on my cornflakes when weekend today continually crossed to Vatican City to monitor the setting up of chairs. “Now these chairs are actually special chairs…” I appreciate that it must be announced, but could anyone have padded this out for any longer if they tried?

    • wayne says:

      09:16pm | 18/10/10

      what about different faiths or athiests?,at least you can have an honest & open debate on catholics,you can be critical,you can mock them,whatever without fear for your safety unlike islam,were’s the muslim welfare agencys & charities?,what do they put back? im not a catholic, i dont agree with all this & the hype surrounding it but what real harm will come of it? its not your money they are taking

    • GGibson says:

      12:08pm | 17/10/10

      The RC church uses the cannonisation of saints as a hold over the people. In many places RC people are bound to return to the priests for forgiveness of sins instead of going straight to God…as the Holy Bible tells us to do. Many also get seduced into buying their relatives out of purgatory with cash-to-the-priest offerings. The Book of Revelation tells us of a great endtimes church called the Great Whore (Revelation chapter 17). To see the RC church seducing other world religions into the World Council of Churches makes me concerned for the safety of all christian believers. I expect that the RC Inquisition Office is secretly, once again, open and the plans are on the table as will be files on dissidents against the RC system. Revelation 20:4 speaks about beheadings within this system. Madam Guilletine is, somewhere, being sharpened. SO!...lets stand apart from anything that looks like World Church. Our relationship, if we desire to go to Heaven, is a personal relationship between man and God through Jesus Christ ONLY! Us and Jesus…not a church system.

    • teresita1897 says:

      10:49pm | 18/10/10

      Oh please. Learn the facts before you start spouting rubbish that is every anti-Catholic christian spouts. If you’re really interested in the truth, why don’t you look at the Catholic Church’s actual teachings and stop repeating this misquoted and inaccurate drivel. If you still have issues with the official teachings, then you can argue them in an intelligent way.

    • Theo Racle says:

      06:13pm | 17/10/10

      How can it be 101 years after her demise that the Vatican finally canonizes Mary MacKillop. All who ever knew her ,are surely gone,this sainthood should have happened shortly after her death,when the testimony to her miracles could be verified by living witnesses. The case for her canonization becomes weaker on this basis alone. I,m sure she was indeed a woman of great energy and passionately devout, virtuous in all activities,but at the end of the day was she better than anyone else who lives a godly and humble life.

    • Gregg says:

      08:26pm | 17/10/10

      Theo,
      The so claimed miracles occurred long after her death, by some praying to her when she was long down under in down under.
      And this was also well after a mobile phone could be buried with her, complete with a lead to a solar charger.

    • Louisa says:

      09:25pm | 17/10/10

      The result means more money rolling into the catholic church….... that is, after all, of much interest to them, as it has always been.

    • Warren says:

      06:35am | 18/10/10

      Next week we can look forward to 24 hour rolling news coverage of why Santa Claus is coming to town.

    • Liz says:

      07:35am | 18/10/10

      I hope her last words are a comfort to those abused children of her church and to those abused in New Zealand by the Josephites.

    • Spaghetti Godess says:

      07:49am | 18/10/10

      No doubt a good person and pretty too so great PR in an establishment which still believes in the virgin birth, accepts a man or could have happily slit his son’s throat and shuffles paedophiles around the globe.  Should be on the Gruen Transfer for a gong.

    • Lauren says:

      08:05am | 18/10/10

      I’m not a catholic or even a religious person at that, but the look of happiness I saw on an old man’s face yesterday as he walked down the street with his Mary Mackillop balloon made my week. Who cares if this is a publicity stunt by the Church, who cares if you don’t believe in the miracles this woman supposedly made. Just tune out and let the people who do believe have their day and their happiness.

    • xyz says:

      10:58am | 19/10/10

      Hence the old saying… ignorance is bliss !

    • Lauren says:

      08:05am | 18/10/10

      I’m not a catholic or even a religious person at that, but the look of happiness I saw on an old man’s face yesterday as he walked down the street with his Mary Mackillop balloon made my week. Who cares if this is a publicity stunt by the Church, who cares if you don’t believe in the miracles this woman supposedly made. Just tune out and let the people who do believe have their day and their happiness.

    • Lauren says:

      08:06am | 18/10/10

      And further to my last comment, if this canonisation makes people want to emulate Mary Mackillop and be better people than surely that’s a great thing, regardless of your beliefs.

    • PaulB says:

      09:04am | 18/10/10

      Plenty of people emulate Mary Mackillop.  they don’t get canonised because canonisation is a reward for magic tricks, not for a life well lived.  Many people receive recognition and meritorious awards for good works, its just that not all come from a strange old man in a dress fronting an organization that covers up massive paedophilia.

    • ibast says:

      08:12am | 18/10/10

      The whole thing seems like a political exercise to me.  Both within international governments and within the Catholic church.  “The claim is pretty weak but we better let Australia have one, just to help the faith down there.”

    • monkeytypist says:

      08:38am | 18/10/10

      The hoopla about this is stupid from a spirtual perspective (if Saints really do have the power to intervene with God, then what does it matter what country they’re from? Surely God doesn’t care? Or can I not pray to St Jude because he isn’t Australian?) - and from a secular perspective (people are welcome to celebrate invisible spirits and dress up all they want, but I don’t really see what this actually does to improve anybody’s life).

    • Fred says:

      09:31am | 18/10/10

      Hurray for all the Brown Joeys- social justice crusaders, present and past, good women who defied Australian Governments by giving refuge in their places of worship to asylum seekers hiding from those who wanted to deport them back to danger.

      Mary MacKillop would have been leading the movement to stop the mistreatment of asylum seekers and promoting universal human rights.

      Funny how politicians reconcile their religious values with their inhumane actions through public servants who dare not defy their Minister!

    • ij says:

      09:41am | 18/10/10

      Why should we celebrate ignorance and superstition?
      It is a sad state of affairs that anyone in this age believes that praying to dead people cures illness.

      Let us not forget the crimes this church, and pope, have committed.

    • Bob H says:

      09:53am | 18/10/10

      If it is a party for all Australians how come saints can only be catholic.  If the miracles were making a village hover in mid air while a flood raged or landing a stricken plane without wings, then I’d be prepared to listen (a bit).  But the miracles are just normal margins of error in medical diagnosis and the probably the benefits of medical intervention.  Pure Wizard of Oz, someone pull the curtain back to show there is no divine agency, just ambitious, corrupt and evil power players living off the good will of congregations. 
      We still have a long way to go on the evolutionary path.

    • Anjuli says:

      10:07am | 18/10/10

      Those of us who are not true Catholics will never understand the adoration given to saints ,who must have been good people to get such recognition . I think of the generation Mary came from when the nuns used to abuse the children by calling them names and beating them , controlling them by fear.

    • Andy says:

      10:11am | 18/10/10

      To all those who believe that anyone who believes in miracles as superstitious nonsense. Let me pose a question, which isn’t aimed at any defense of the church. If the shoe was on the other foot and you were told you had terminal cancer, I bet you would try anything no matter how unscientifically sound it was to beat it? The only people who can really judge these miracles are the doctors and health workers who attended to the claimants and have the full story. If it was good enough for them as it obviously was, than they wouldn’t have backed Mary’s case.

    • ij says:

      11:08am | 18/10/10

      It’s called statistics. Dead people cannot cure what ails you.

    • Mr Pod says:

      11:18am | 18/10/10

      @Andy   “The only people who can really judge these miracles are the doctors and health workers who attended to the claimants and have the full story” 
      So science knows everything? medical practitioners are not all seeing masters (there’s a theme there)  plenty of miraculous recoveries from terminal illnesses exist without the help of praying to catholic icons and plenty of terminal cases pray for recovery and to no avail - who’s responsible there?  People of faith are always too willing to give credit to their faith while ignoring others efforts, the Chilean mining rescue was also apparently due to a catholic God and nothing to do with stunning engineering solutions.  Thank goodness I was never subjected to such effective indoctrination.

    • Dazeddazza says:

      10:30am | 18/10/10

      A ridiculous affair, the lot of it.  Pray to her and be made well????  I tried it just now on my hangover, didn’t work!!!!  Had to resort to Paracetamol.

    • True Believer says:

      11:04am | 18/10/10

      One thing strikes me out all this derision of Christian belief is that atheists/unbelievers are so busy using their time attempting insulting those of us who are believers (regardless of denomination) they will not be found doing mighty works for their fellow man. No need for saints among those representing lack of belief appearing on this site.

      For me I am not a Catholic just a Christian but I would rather see the lovely face of Mary McKillop on the front of my newspaper than the cold aloof and cynical one of Richard Dawkins (perhaps the atheist’s “saint” -oops - I mean - guru). He believes in nothing and his face shows it.

    • TheRealDave says:

      11:31am | 18/10/10

      We are trying to catch up to all the times ‘Christians’ waste our time and annoy us by banging on our doors at ungodly hours to ‘save’ us.

      We still have plenty of catching up to do.

    • Steely Dan says:

      11:41am | 18/10/10

      @ True Believer

      “One thing strikes me out all this derision of Christian belief is that atheists/unbelievers are so busy using their time attempting insulting those of us who are believers (regardless of denomination) they will not be found doing mighty works for their fellow man.”
      And I could say that religious people are too busy praying, building crosses and circumcising each other to be charitable, but that would be just as ridiculous as what you said.  What a terrible, baseless jibe dressed up as an argument.  People like you are the reason I only give to non-religious charities - so we can destroy this myth that my position on your God makes me selfish.

      “For me I am not a Catholic just a Christian but I would rather see the lovely face of Mary McKillop on the front of my newspaper than the cold aloof and cynical one of Richard Dawkins…
      You can tell a person’s character by looking into their eyes?  What about reading their tea leaves, measuring their skulls, or photographing their auras?  Those methods are just as reliable.

      “He believes in nothing and his face shows it.”
      Not believing in God = believing in nothing?  We are in the presence of a great logician, people.

    • Tedd says:

      11:48am | 18/10/10

      Oh dear, TrueB; why the need for an ‘ad hominem’ attack on a distant person?  Prof. Dawkins may have been a bit of a lightening rod, but has there been much effect of that? 

      It would seem St Mary of the Cross would enjoy his efforts in education about biology, particularly as the Catholic church shares his support of evolution as fact, despite no-one knowing what started biological life.

    • Reg says:

      02:50pm | 18/10/10

      Yes it did work dazza, she directed you to the Paracetamol bottle on the grounds that she didn’t want to bother God. What are yuh? shheeeee

    • True Believer says:

      02:57pm | 18/10/10

      To TheRealDave I think you would find the people you think are Christians “banging on our doors are from the major cults and not Christians at all.  They come to my place and I just advise them I am a Christian and that leaves them having to face the fact I know they are not. They do not bother me again.

      To Steely Dan
      One thing I say for you dear folk you are wonderfully consistent in your ability to make gross misjudgments about something you so patently have no real knowledge of.  I guess while you are harassing Christians - (and yes we can take it - just bounces off) :0) - you are sparing others of your vitriol.  Would be nice to have an informed discussion, but you are apparently incapable of that. Pity. I wish you well. You amuse me, although it is sad to see such cynicism in one so young.

      To Tedd

      “Tedd says Oh dear, TrueB; why the need for an ‘ad hominem’ attack on a distant person?  Prof. Dawkins may have been a bit of a lightening rod, but has there been much effect of that?”

      Now this one truly takes the cake - distant person???? Mary McKillop was distant and is now deceased, but it does not stop the venomous outpourings from the great ill-informed in so many of these posts. :0) How courageous is that. ‘

      Richard Dawkins a lightening rod??? I think not - more like a torch without a battery!!!!  But hey if you wish to venerate him dear soul, you just go right ahead. I will stick with Whom I know has the real power.

    • Tedd says:

      06:57pm | 18/10/10

      TrueB, you brought up Dawkins unnecessarily and thus spitefully, and continued the spite in your second post.

      I made a positive comment about Mary and you ignored that.

    • Steely Dan says:

      11:37am | 19/10/10

      @ True Believer

      “One thing I say for you dear folk you are wonderfully consistent in your ability to make gross misjudgments about something you so patently have no real knowledge of.”
      The phrase ‘you don’t know nuffin’ would have been just as vapid, but more concise.

      “Would be nice to have an informed discussion, but you are apparently incapable of that.”
      Says the person that declared all atheists to be uncharitable without attempting to show justification for the statement!  But who needs reason when you have faith, eh TB?
      Now run along, grown-ups are talking.

    • True Believer says:

      05:02pm | 19/10/10

      Steely Dan

      I did not say ALL atheists I said the ones who had put up these posts. Not all unbelievers lack sensitivity/respect for the beliefs of others in my very long experience. I can assure you I am very mature, so you too make assumptions which are erroneous - perhaps on the God problem your assumptions are also flawed???????

    • Steely Dan says:

      09:59am | 20/10/10

      @ True Believer

      To quote you:
      “One thing strikes me out all this derision of Christian belief is that atheists/unbelievers are so…”
      If it’s not a sweeping generalisation, it’s a terrible constructed sentence that conveys - to any rational reader - a different meaning to the one you’re now claiming.  Take your pick. 

      “I can assure you I am very mature, so you too make assumptions which are erroneous…”
      It’s rational for me to assume that a sentence that reads as a broad and baseless generalisation might have been intended as a broad and baseless generalisation.  And it’s also rational for me to assume that a person who claims that they can assess a person’s character by looking into a photo of their eyes does not meet the criteria we expect of mature thinkers.

      “perhaps on the God problem your assumptions are also flawed???????
      Can’t rule it out.  But you certainly haven’t provided any reason for me to think I’m in error.  Ad hominem attacks are for people who don’t actually have reasonable points to make.

    • True Believer says:

      10:50am | 20/10/10

      Steely Dan

      Well you seem to be more interested in grammar than in deeper questions of philosophy than a reality that remains unseen.

      I doubt you would listen to any reasonable comment relating to a belief that differs from your own. From you lofty perch of extreme ignorance on spiritual matters you trivialise anything you cannot or will not try to understand.  It is a shame.  God cannot be intellectualised although C S Lewis, renowned philosopher, made a good fist of it in coming to his realisation that God is real - look for his books online and his wisdom too if you truly are interested in a more positive point of view of our creation and Creator.

      I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.
      C. S. Lewis

      I gave in, and admitted that God was God.
      C. S. Lewis

    • Steely Dan says:

      12:25pm | 20/10/10

      @ True Believer

      “Well you seem to be more interested in grammar than in deeper questions of philosophy than a reality that remains unseen.”
      Nice dodge attempt.  You’ve been asked to justify your statement that any atheist is likely to be less charitable because they are too busy insulting people, but you’ve declined the offer.  The ball is in your court, and you’re accusing me of a uniform code violation.

      “I doubt you would listen to any reasonable comment relating to a belief that differs from your own.”
      Oh, right.  ‘I have a whole heap of great arguments, but you’d just ignore them, so I won’t give them to you’.  Very mature. 

      CS Lewis was a wonderful poet but a terrible philosopher, as those lyrically appealing but useless quotes demonstrate.

    • xyz says:

      02:20pm | 20/10/10

      True Believer:

      What an apt name you have given yourself because it appears that you are suffering from “True-believer syndrome”. 

      ‘No amount of evidence, no matter how good it is or how much there is of it, is ever going to convince the true believer to the contrary’ (James Randi).

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome

    • True Believer says:

      04:04pm | 20/10/10

      xyz

      When you know the Truth why settle for second best. Guess you are happy to :0)  Your choice my friend sad as that is.

    • True Believer says:

      06:29pm | 20/10/10

      Steely Dan
      Having been once an unbeliever I do understand your stance, but it makes me sad. I wonder if you would just entertain the idea that you might, you just might be wrong. I know you would find it very worthwhile to peek over the top of your prejudices. smile

    • xyz says:

      10:58am | 21/10/10

      True Believer:

      You are forgetting that most of us ‘unbelievers’ in Australia were actually brought up as ‘believers’ in Christianity. We have come to our current positions after decades of research and some very deep thinking!

      There’s no need to feel sadness for us…. we don’t. However, we do subscribe to the old adage in your case - “Ignorance is bliss”.

      Stay happy…. I know I am!

    • Steely Dan says:

      11:49am | 21/10/10

      @ True Believer

      “Having been once an unbeliever I do understand your stance, but it makes me sad.”
      So you found a way to live without reason?

      “I wonder if you would just entertain the idea that you might, you just might be wrong.”
      And you’ve found a way to read without paying attention.  Otherwise you’d recall this exchange:
      TB: perhaps on the God problem your assumptions are also flawed???????
      SD: Can’t rule it out.  But you certainly haven’t provided any reason for me to think I’m in error.

      Glad to see you stick to your principles, though.  Don’t let those people who ask you for justification, explanation or reasonable thinking bully you into actually providing any.  Just keep throwing out ad hominems like a trooper!

    • True Believer says:

      01:49pm | 21/10/10

      Steely Dan

      Hey well you are a bully with insight that is refreshing!!! I congratulate you. A rare phenomenon indeed. Not many bullies admit to their folly.

      However, your bullying is like a fly landing on a 747 I just flick it off. I only have to answer to One not to scoffers. You are obviously an intelligent person, but of course human intelligence is not so important in God’s eyes. It is humility and a trusting heart He pays attention to. Thankfully He has granted me both. smile  I hope sincerely that having found human intelligence you will move on to the greatest Intelligence of all. You will never regret it.

      xyz

      Yes well Christianity is not a matter of how one was brought up. It is a mature and conscious decision to realise that a relationship with the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Not the ponderous and often futile machinations of the little human mind. Keep seeking, the happiness you think you have now I can promise you will fade into insignificance if and when you stop striving and realise the Truth you are missing.  I can say that will no doubt at all having viewed the situation from both sides. I wish you well in your search and urge you not to give up and settle for second best.

      You still have much

    • Austin 3:16 says:

      07:43am | 06/11/10

      @ True Believer,

      Is pride no longer a sin? Have the rules been updated?

    • Sam Chowder says:

      11:20am | 18/10/10

      61 comments and no flying spaghetti monster appearance, worlds gone mad

    • TheRealDave says:

      11:29am | 18/10/10

      Ahh the Catholic Church, setting up as one of their ‘champions’ a woman who they excommunicated because she railed against their corruption and exposed them for the frauds they were/still are.

      Just when you think the modern church couldn’t get any more hypocritical.

      What’s next? Michael Jackson honoured for his work with children?

    • Rob says:

      11:38am | 18/10/10

      It has been fascinating to see the spin on this nonsense.  Originally Sister McKillop had to be proved to have performed miracles to be declared a Saint.  Now all the talk is about her good deeds and strength of character - all of which is probably true.  However, that does not make one a Saint.  To be declared a Saint the Church of Rome has to determine that miracles have been performed.  The Bible is however, quite clear on this.  “I am the way the truth and the life NO MAN COMETH UNTO THE FATHER BUT BY ME”, spoke Jesus (John 14:6).  Praying to any individual alive or dead will achieve nothing since only God performs miracles and it is to him that one must pray.

    • Andrew says:

      11:48am | 18/10/10

      People!  It’s time to show the entire canonisation process for the sham that it is.  May I present to you Australia’s next great saint - my Cat (let’s call him ‘Kitty’, he’s quite shy and doesn’t want to use his real name here).  Kitty is an ordinary cat, but I really do believe that if you pray to him, all your problems will be solved!  So, please, every pray to ‘Kitty’ for everything in your life - that you’ll win the lottery, or pick the winner in the Cup next month, that you’ll score a century in your cricket match on the weekend.  Perhaps that your terrible case of athlete’s foot will be magically cured!  At least a few of these things will no doubt come true, and when they do, write to the vatican and let them know it was all due to MY CAT!  With the thousands of miracles that will no doubt have been performed in his name, they cannot refuse to name him “St Kitty - patron saint of sardines, salmon, and other seafood”.  Not only will he be australia’s first male (well, not quite male) saint, but also the first feline!

      Oh, just to keep it all in the spirit of the catholic church, all prayers to Kitty will attract a small ‘listening’ fee, I mean ‘donation’, of $1.  He’s very busy you see, and it is quite taxing having to listen to all your whining, err, pleas for assistance.  Cans of tuna also accepted.

    • Teddie says:

      12:47pm | 18/10/10

      St Kitts is a magical name in honour of a magical cat, and a magical place.

    • Johnno says:

      12:54pm | 18/10/10

      In ancient Egypt, cats were worshipped as gods. Cats have never forgotten this.

    • Stiffy says:

      12:11pm | 18/10/10

      I am very pleased to see Mary MacKillop’s canonisation. It is something i had hoped for over many years having discussed her good work with her Devils Advocate back in the early 70’s. To me the ‘miracle’ part of her canonisation is really more of a media side show or the necessary catholic bells and whistles. Her beatification is the recognition of the holy life she lead. She was a truly charitable Australian and this seems to have been lost in most of the comments above.

    • bigmuzz says:

      12:12pm | 18/10/10

      is it un-australian to say i am completely over hearing about mary mackillop?....

    • AFR says:

      12:41pm | 18/10/10

      +1. I turned on the news for the last 3 days and its all they are talking about.

    • Judas says:

      12:26pm | 18/10/10

      In breaking news - the canonisation has been revoked due to the startling discovery of… medical science…

    • TheRealDave says:

      12:55pm | 18/10/10

      Here’s your Silver - NEXT!

    • Sadiq Farris says:

      01:06pm | 18/10/10

      St George And St Kilda are not Australian Saints!
      Mary McKillop is the greatest ever Australia as she is Australia’s only Saint.

    • Al says:

      01:54pm | 18/10/10

      So you are basicly saying this:
      A person CAN’T be the ‘greatest ever Australian’ for the simple fact that they 1) Aren’t Catholic. 2) Only commited great acts DURING there lifetime, without the fanciful imaginings that they can cure cancer after they are dead. What a load.
      Also, doesn’t the ENTIRE idea of Saints go against one of the basic tennants of the bible - NO ONE enters ‘heaven’ OR ‘hell’ until AFTER THE FINAL JUDGEMENT.
      Until then they stay in pergatory (not sure I spelled that right!), so how can they be performing ‘miracles’ when according to the bible they have not faced the ‘final judgement’ yet?

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      01:34pm | 18/10/10

      What a load of nensense this entire MacKillop charade has been. Kevin Andrews say we should all rejoice, a, presumably, Catholic priest in Rome said that “it (this canonisation nonsense) was a Momentous occassion for All Australians”. Rubbish. I do not doubt Mary did some good during her lifetime but then so have countless other men & women.
      Quite obviously her alleged goodness did not extend to all her nuns in the schools she is credited with starting for there have been numerous reports from many who attended those schools who were subjected to downright bastardry by those self-same nuns.
      This may be a momentous occassion for Catholics but that is as far as it goes. We have long been told that the Primary Requirement of the Catholic Church for canonisation within that church, it does NOT speak for ALL Christians, is the “Proving of Two Medical Miracles”. One was, reportedly, the curing of a young child, he/she has never come forward so we don’t know if he/she is even still alive. The other is a woman who claims she has been cured of cancer. Cured or in remission? What will Rome do if this woman’s, everyone catholic or not will hope it never happns, cancer reappears? Cancel the sinthood or dredge up another ‘miracle’ from somewhere.
      Even within the Catholic Church itself the vast majority of adherents to that form of Christianity do no believe in miracles.
      Hopefully now that the charade has ended in Rome the media will get back to reporting real news. Hopefully it will continue with it’s ever-increasing revelations of Paedophile behaviour by priests, prelates,nuns & brothers & other unordianed holy nellies.
      Mary is now being touted as a Defnder of Children Against Paedophile Religious.Until very recently there was never any talk that she had reported a priest for sexual abuse of boys. It is very telling that we are now told that the main reason she was excommunicated was because of this alleged report. Doubtless the Archbishop/Bishop was also a paedophile because he simple, we are told, sent the criminal priest back to Ireland to continue his crimes.
      It was a very big mistake to raise the issue of Paedophile Priests for it only went to confirm that Physical, Sexual & Emotional abuse of little boys & girls is not a modern phenomenon, as many have cliamed, but a perversion which has been rampant within Religious Orders (Roman Catholic, Anglican & other sects) for many generations.

    • cybacaT says:

      02:52pm | 18/10/10

      She sounds like an amazing lady whose example all Australians should draw inspiration from.  I’m not Catholic, but can recognise the good works she has done.  I feel sorry for the haters who have posted here - people whose venomous sneering exposes nothing but their own shortcomings.

    • Joe says:

      05:43pm | 18/10/10

      I agree cybacaT. Mary Achieved so much in so little time and with NO government funding. She saw generations weren’t going to be educated if she didn’t step in and help. And by her death she had over 100 schools and 750 nuns all volunteering their life for her cause. Amazing stuff.

    • PaulB says:

      05:56pm | 18/10/10

      Her good works are not however the reason we are having this discussion.  They have no real bearing on the awarding of Sainthood.  If anything the whole Sainthood concept devalues the real work people like this may do in the real world.

    • Mr Pastry says:

      04:24pm | 18/10/10

      First Australian saint brilliant, do I pray to her for a Lotto or pokie win?

    • Vic says:

      10:22pm | 18/10/10

      People who claim “miracles” are no different from people who claim there are UFOs. Mad is Mad, no matter whether its sanctified or not.

    • paul says:

      03:53pm | 19/10/10

      when she spoke out about crimes against children she was punished now days they hide the preists and hide the truth. typical catholics. not matter how much the pope apologises he is just going through the motions in the hope that the public will be satisfied. greatest load of rubbish ever. the public know the truth and will never beleive a word he says another cover u[p

    • xyz says:

      04:17pm | 19/10/10

      Why has it taken until 2010 for both Australia and Canada to receive their first RC saints… and on the same day as well?

      This smacks of “Marketing 101” !

    • Chris M says:

      09:17pm | 19/10/10

      There is the potential for believers to avoid trusting a doctors advice and praying to Mary Mackillop for a cure, there by two phony miracles could possibly lead to more deaths.

    • OriginalAussie says:

      07:13am | 20/10/10

      What a load of codswallop…We can all celebrate McK are you kidding or what? I have no interest in this subject; It’s crazy in this day and age; It can only be of interest to RCatholics; She was a mortal just like anyone else; I agree with xyz ; Religion in the opiate of the masses, and as far as i’m concerned the masses can have it lock stock and barrel.

    • OriginalAussie says:

      08:25am | 20/10/10

      PS: RCatholics - heres one for you; make her the patron saint of Abused Children in the Catholic Church - then see how many prayers are answered.

    • Adam says:

      08:38am | 20/10/10

      Yes l wonder what Mary would have thought of the demonisation and treatment of the boat people when Kevin was minister. Successful Catholics generally dont practice what they preech.

    • Anne Stocks says:

      12:24pm | 06/08/11

      cybacaT says… She sounds like an amazing lady whose example all Australians should draw inspiration from.  I’m not Catholic, but can recognise the good works she has done.  I feel sorry for the haters who have posted here - people whose venomous sneering exposes nothing but their own shortcomings.

      Thank you cybacaT…  yes we do need to give thanks for the faithfulness that others have in serving The Lord because all good things come from God including our motivation for doing good.

      Kind Regards Anne

    • LeanMachine says:

      05:47pm | 01/04/12

      Little is known about the amazing work and accomplishments of Mary MacKillop in the Kapunda area, but this new book by historian and Kapunda resident Peter Swann, “Kapunda and the Mary MacKillop Connection” reveals all. Available from:
      http://www.leanmachine.net.au/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=7&products_id=84 at only $9.95 - a must for all interested in the outstanding achievements of this great woman. This comes from LeanMachine - and I’m not even a Catholic!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter