Would it be too much to ask to have a saint with a family

Anthony says:

06:03am | 23/12/09

The sentiment is noble - the concept of a wholesome, faithful relationship has indeed become weaker in modern times, I think, although perhaps it is just less well-hidden than before in history - and I respect that the author had difficult childhood experiences due to this.

With that said, however, I hate it when people ask that an organized religion change its ways in order to ‘rebrand its image’ or ‘move with the times’. It cheapens the supposed divinity of religion. If religion truly is the law of a higher being, then it seems rather silly that we can just change it to be however we want it to be at the time.

I am not religious in any way and I’m not interested in defending the particular values of any religion. I just don’t think that religion is the right outlet for this kind of social movement. If we want to make heroes and role models, we can do it as an independent people, without religion. Asking the religion to change both infringes on the religious conservatives and suggests that non-religious people can’t move forward without religious leadership. I think we’d be better off working on progress as Australians and not as Christians.

Delia says:

07:20am | 23/12/09

The look of seriousness on the faces of some of these religous people is frightening. The fact that they truely believe that “Miracles” have occured because of Mary McK is beyond me. Miracles occur in ordinary life everyday to everyday people. People survive cancer everyday, and so on. It’s these same people who believe a spuernatural being impregnated a virgin with the Messiah? I really can’t understand how people who believe this stuff get so much air time and are taken so seriously.

Jones says:

07:40am | 23/12/09

I nominate my husband.

RT says:

07:40am | 23/12/09

Delia - I don’t think those responsible for the sanctification of Mary McKillop, ie Archbishop Pell and The Pope, really believe that she performs miracles at all. It’s a part of the centuries-old racket run by the Catholic Church, a cynical ploy to bring in or retain more adherents to the faith, particularly those with incurable diseases and their loved ones.
Anthony: religion is not the creation of a higher being but of humans. It’s a set of power structures set up for the benefit the powerful. Religion can, does and probably should move with the times because much of it, eg the Old Testament, is mediaeval and at odds with modern day mores.

Jeff says:

08:35am | 23/12/09

My Bible says I should pray to God, who is accessible because of what Jesus Christ did on the cross. Nowhere can I find that I should pray to Saints, Popes, dead people etc.
More rules and traditions will never replace a personal relationship with ones Maker.

Jim says:

08:39am | 23/12/09

Simple really. Stick to your values and put what is important ahead of silly teenage urges.

You can keep the catholic “do-gooders” well away from me. Religion is a total crock.

Bonhoeffer says:

09:01am | 23/12/09

This whole circus may have been much more believeable without the ears-back marketing campaign which is now well under way.

Particularly as the naturally strong, purposeful features of Mary McKillop have been PhotoShopped literally out of recognition into some synthetic apparition of designer holiness.

Biff says:

09:46am | 23/12/09

Phil Adams over at the Oz has been campaigning hard to have PJ Keating beatified. Adams must be rather frustrated that the Vatican remains unimpressed by Keating’s miracles.

Paul says:

11:03am | 23/12/09

I nominate Akmal http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ9J_o7hI94&feature=related

Beamer says:

11:26am | 23/12/09

Given my recent dealing with the Romans, I would never regard any of them as favourable role models for anything other than a sordid grab for cash!!

IMHO says:

11:27am | 23/12/09

Very cool piece Chris and so true. The most importantly and saintly role a human being can play is to raise their children in a safe loving environment and stay true to their marriage vows. Everything after that is bonus saintly behaviour. Also much easier to do all those other saintly works if one chooses the single life! So well said.

Lenny J says:

12:03pm | 23/12/09

Sorry Anthony, you missed the boat big time…

If religions can ‘move with the times’ and ‘keep themselves relevant’ by re-vising the presentation and retaining the basic message all to the good.

However, they don’t seem to want to. Who knows who benefits from this reluctance? I could offer some suggestions.

All well and good to stick to your guns I would say but when you have no members then what?

Currently all the traditional ‘big’ religions seem to be losing out to modern presentations that are more relevant to people’s lives now in the 21st century (also sadly to some of the looney fringe religions as well).

Your choice - Update, keep the presentation of the message relevant or die out.  Pretty basic lesson of history I would have thought….

Darren says:

12:55pm | 23/12/09

Catholics are the biggest pyramid scheme in the world. Looks like they’ve a great franchise here too with Conroy and Abbott.

Henrietta says:

02:48pm | 23/12/09

There are married Saints - St Thomas More springs to mind as well as the married couple Luigi and Maria Beltrame Quattrocchi that John Paul II beatified (well they’re not canonized yet…but they’re on their way) We celebrate their feast on their wedding anniversary. What about St Monica?

With respect Chris, I think someone needs to buy you a dictionary of the Saints for Christmas

Peter Simmons says:

03:13pm | 23/12/09

For those who believe in God,  no explanation is necessary.

For those who do not believe,  no explanation is possible.

Chris Gardiner says:

03:45pm | 23/12/09

Henrietta, let’s put aside the matter of the unbelievably small percentage of saints who were not priests or religious sistes or brothers. Thomas More was sainted as a counter-reformation ideologue, having supported the persecution and execution of heretics. I’m unconfortable with him as a role model. St Monica was sainted, I suspect, primarily becuase she was the mother of Augustine. From memory, one piece I read on her also suggested she encouraged a rather submissive approach for women being abused by their husbands. As for Luigi and Maria Beltrame Quattrochi, we are getting a little closer to a modern couple, except for the part where they forswore sexual relations in their 40s (as I recall), an act apparently strenghtening their standing with a church that promotes celibacy as the highest calling.

But let’s accept that it is possible for a married person who has had kids to be sainted. I’d just suggest we improve the percentage and draw the next Australian saint from the ranks of the married and harried laity.

Lenny J says:

04:08pm | 23/12/09

Oh Peter Simmons..,
How throughout human history have the fundamentalist fringe hidden behind the words you quote. They simultaneously give you a screen to hide behind as you refuse to engage in reasonable debate and exclude all who do not believe exactly what you do.
This leads me to wonder if it is atheists you don’t abide or all faiths simply different to yours.
Come on get real and engage in the modern world or doom yourself to irrelevance. If you can’t debate your faith, then I am afraid I don’t want anything to do with it.
I too left mine for the same reasons. Closed minds and exclusionary behaviour; 2 aspects of my old faith that were not part of the message they ‘apparently’ taught.

Anthony says:

09:34pm | 23/12/09

Lenny J - I wasn’t considering this from the religious organization’s point of view, but rather, that of the people that ask for them to change. Certainly a religion may very well lose members if it does not adapt to the times. But if it does not do this of its own accord, why try to drag it forward? Society can step forward without asking religion to lead it first. We shouldn’t be asking churches to change their policy. Let them die out if they don’t want to - it doesn’t matter.

I just don’t really see why we have to bring religion into it if we want to promote social progress it doesn’t really want to change (if religious organizations did want to, they would have done so of their own accord), when we can go forward without.

Joe says:

05:00am | 24/12/09

I am certain there are many married saints who are simply unsung. I am sure some of us could think of some. The advantage that religious saints have (ie sisters, brothers, priests) is that they have a religious order to study their lives and make their life stories known. I can think of saintly stoic grandmothers for example who have quietly done so much for their families, often with less than perfect husbands, through times of depression and hardship wihout all our modern cons and with out complaint. Maybe we just need to jecognise more of these people arround us everyday.

Kylie says:

09:48am | 24/12/09

It sounds to me like it’s really just role models, not saints that you are looking for. I agree that it’s great for people to have mentors that have faced similar life challenges and succeeded.
My mother, who worked, raised a family and is still married to my dad is a far more of a mentor to me than Mary Mc. Same for my husband and his father.
We are lucky to have those role models close to home, but not everyone is so fortunate. Your story makes me realise we should make an effort to get involved in some form of mentoring program.

cats says:

10:47am | 24/12/09

I agree that role models need to be people we can relate to. They need to be all-rounder generous people who do not screw around other people, and who care about the environment and the animals we share the world with.

I think that society needs to shun selfish, arrogant people who do not care about anyone else except for themselves. Problem is that there are many people nowdays that are like this. The New Scientist did an article recently where it comes naturally for social people to care about others, where as individualists struggle to care about anyone else except for themselves. I think natural selection needs to take its course and individualists die out, but thats an arguement for another day..

Lisa says:

12:46pm | 24/12/09

For most people, a functional family is as close as is possible to get to God: God in action, in a way. But truly religious people see family as a kind of tribalism, ultimately, that must also give way for a broader serving of the people.
I agree, though, that much more needs to be done to support and foster family in this country. But where do you start? Many people who have the power to help steer our culture are really quite anti-family, seeing ‘family’ as a traditional concept to be torn down.