There's something deeply human about the kinds of behaviors that emerge in such highly exemplary individuals as saints, which truly transcends cultural boundaries. I'm more familiar with Indian spirituality (despite being Western myself), and the archetypes of the saint and the sage are very much alive there... and a special loving closeness to animals is also often a feature. The stories of Ramana Maharshi with all sorts of visiting monkeys, deer, crows and other local animals are amazingly endearing, and show a human, empathetic side of the sage that completely belies the image of utter aloofness that Indian yogis can sometimes project. The parallels with St. Francis just write themselves.
I am interested you wrote on this because earlier today I read a long article in the Washington Post about a potential new saint who has just been certified as having a second miracle, Carlo Acutis. He’d be the first saint of millennials. I just thought “Catholics are weird.” Your argument that saints can be seen as moral exemplars makes sense. But what about this miracle business? In explanation: (My staunchly Methodist mother would lightly scoff at Catholic practices as “pagan.”)
The miracles are a bit odd--my personal view on miracles is that miracles should not, and cannot violate the laws of nature. Nonetheless, they are remarkable happenings. The places where saints are revered are often locations of tiny miracles in the sense of remarkable happenings in people's lives. I've known shrines where you can see all those very touching little notes by people who were healed or had something else remarkably good happen to them after they petitioned. I find this more significant than the miracles by which the Catholic Church vets sainthood. These things clearly don't work in a statistical sense. If they did then part of cancer therapy would include a trip to a shrine. But they are still significant in a religious sense.
There's something deeply human about the kinds of behaviors that emerge in such highly exemplary individuals as saints, which truly transcends cultural boundaries. I'm more familiar with Indian spirituality (despite being Western myself), and the archetypes of the saint and the sage are very much alive there... and a special loving closeness to animals is also often a feature. The stories of Ramana Maharshi with all sorts of visiting monkeys, deer, crows and other local animals are amazingly endearing, and show a human, empathetic side of the sage that completely belies the image of utter aloofness that Indian yogis can sometimes project. The parallels with St. Francis just write themselves.
Oh how fascinating! This does sound very similar! I will look him up as I like St Francis a lot I feel llike I will like him too!
I am interested you wrote on this because earlier today I read a long article in the Washington Post about a potential new saint who has just been certified as having a second miracle, Carlo Acutis. He’d be the first saint of millennials. I just thought “Catholics are weird.” Your argument that saints can be seen as moral exemplars makes sense. But what about this miracle business? In explanation: (My staunchly Methodist mother would lightly scoff at Catholic practices as “pagan.”)
The miracles are a bit odd--my personal view on miracles is that miracles should not, and cannot violate the laws of nature. Nonetheless, they are remarkable happenings. The places where saints are revered are often locations of tiny miracles in the sense of remarkable happenings in people's lives. I've known shrines where you can see all those very touching little notes by people who were healed or had something else remarkably good happen to them after they petitioned. I find this more significant than the miracles by which the Catholic Church vets sainthood. These things clearly don't work in a statistical sense. If they did then part of cancer therapy would include a trip to a shrine. But they are still significant in a religious sense.
This is really making me re-think my attitude about the saints. Thank you!