Does the Church canonize saints to increase the number of those who can render powerful spiritual and material assistance to those of us still living on earth? In other words, are saints primarily intercessors and miracle-workers?
He proposes an alternative.
Saints are also exemplars or models of the Christian life, of what it means to be truly holy.
Which, for him, raises a quandry.
Whom should the Church raise up for the emulation of the overwhelming majority of its members, who are lay, married, parents, and grandparents, and who are in no realistic danger of being martyred for the faith?
Somewhere along the way, the idea of learning from experiences different from our own has been lost. I've read reports of controversies about suburban high school literature classes reading novels about suburban high school students. Some parents objected to the sexual content. I'd object to the parochialism. Father McBrien serves as a spokesman for the increased parochialism of the post-Vatican II Church.
It would be a wiser pastoral course for the Church to canonize more saints who were not martyred, were married, had children and grandchildren, and who did not enter a convent or found a new religious community after the death of their spouse.
One possible future candidate phoned in.
Of course, there is "white martyrdom," loosely defined as having to read McBrien (or live under Weakland) while growing in holiness and Catholicism.
ReplyDelete