I would question this site on many grounds, starting with this:
So many of the saints are western, white and single and there seem to be more men than women.
They seem to lack an understanding of where ‘saints’ even come from, and what the term means. The statement made me question how often they’ve actually read any Lives of the Saints. A Saint by definition, is one whom the Catholic Church has investigated and found evidence they are in Heaven.
By definition, they investigate Catholics. Saints are heroes and role models of the *Catholic *faith. Being that Catholicism has been more a religion of the west than the east, it’s hardly surprising that there would be an abundance of westerners–who are often white. The article shortly after questions why there are no saints of other faiths. Again…well, because the *Catholic *Church doesn’t investigate the lives of others outside the Catholic faith for canonization. Buddhists and HIndus can declare saints among their faiths if they like, and I, for one, would not care that Catholics are not on the list, because they’re declaring heroes of the *Buddhist *faith, of which I am not a member!
On the second count, to have a list of canonized Saints never meant that they believe no one else is in Heaven except these people, making their tongue in cheek remark that “the Church Triumphant isn’t very inclusive.” rather silly, and another demonstration of their lack of understanding that on which they write.
On the third count, I am as familiar with any number of female saints as with men. This is just a ridiculous statement.
Finally, those included on the list are suspect. Perpetua and Felicity have already been mentioned. I have some very close female friends. This doesn’t make me a lesbian. This is simply ridiculous logic.
I looked further and found “Saint” Edward II, king of England. Edward II of England is not a canonized saint. I question, too, the history they give of him, even apart from claiming he’s a saint.
I clicked on Saint Julian of Norwich, someone with whom I’m somewhat familiar, having recently done a study on her. Their article says:
Mother Julian qualifies as transgendered for her name, if nothing else
I read the rest and could still find no basis other than that for calling her transgendered. They quote some of her writings saying, All will be well, and assuring us that God loves every living thing. This hardly makes one transgendered.
Praedicare makes excellent points.
I would add, there may well be saints who
struggled with same sex attraction, but there is not going to be a ‘saint’ who lived a life of active, open, *unrepentant *homosexuality, because this would not be a life of heroic virtue.
*Every *saint would have cared for and loved any person with same sex attraction because every person is a child of God. This doesn’t mean they approve of the behavior, any more than lifting a drug addict out of the gutter and caring for him means someone approves of using drugs. So there may be already or one day, a patron saint of homosexuals, but it’s not going to mean that this saint was gay and has been named a heroic role model. It’s going to mean that this saint had a great heart for those struggling with same sex attraction. It’s going to be the saint people would pray to when they’re
struggling with it, not as proof that the behavior itself is godly.
