dictionary.reference.com gives the meaning of the word "Saint" as:
- any of certain persons of exceptional holiness of life, formally recognized as such by the Christian Church, esp. by canonization.
- a person of great holiness, virtue, or benevolence.
- a founder, sponsor, or patron, as of a movement or organization. (in certain religious groups) a designation applied by the members to themselves.
- Has The Hindu accepted the arbitrariness and onesidedness in the usage of the word "Saint" by the Roman Catholic Church? Is a person deemed to be a "Saint" only if he/she has been "canonized" to be so by the Vatican. One of the six articles boldly declares “First Woman Saint of India”, pray, what happened to Mirabai, Jana bai, Kannagi, Ahilyabai Holkar, Sharada ma, Anandamayi maa, Durgapuri maa, Gauri maa, Akka Mahadevi, Mata Amritanandamayi, Anandamurti guru maa, (who have/are lived/living a life of "holiness, virtue and benevolence.") Not only this, India has a rich tradition of having produced woman leaders (Jhansi Rani Lakshmi Bai, Jijabai, Ahilyabai Holkar etc.) hence the "first" ness of Sister Alphonsa doesn't surprise a lay Indian, but what surprises him/her is the time it took the church to recognise an Indian woman as a "Saint" (howsoever dubious the basis be.)
- Is The Hindu which has carried 6 items in its "National" section about the event, in consonance with the basis for the "canonization"? (that of "The miraculous cure of the club foot of Thomas Athiyalil wrought through her intercession") Has it gone into the facts of the case? In case it hasn't, I, Shrivathsa, hereby claim that I have raised a hunderd people from the dead, and have 6 people write articles about me to The Hindu. To be fair to me, The Hindu should publish such articles. Or is it that it won't publish them just because the recognition wouldn't come from the Roman Catholic church. Doesn't this show the newspaper in a poor light, a hangover from the colonial times of the native being overawed of the gorababu.
- Does The Hindu accept the implication from the act of canonization of Annakutty that the Christian religion which claims its existence for 1800 years in India has not been able to find a single "native" Female "Saint" till the canonization of Annakutty? Does it accept that this isn't an honour but a disgrace (howsoever dubious the basis for the "canonization" be)? Can it gather the courage to write an editorial about the insult that has been meted out to the women of India?
- Is The Hindu indeed a voice of the Christian church? Why does it carry so many articles on one day on almost a non event. What is the event after all? There was a woman who is claimed to have done a "miracle", that of curing a person with a club foot. The woman is "canonized" as a "Saint" by an organization (Roman Catholic church) which has a declared aim of christianizing India by 2020. (Ref.: Joshua 2 project site)
- The Hindu has dubious reputation of publishing only those letters to the editor which toe its line. This being the case, publishing six articles on a single day on the "canonization" probably betrays a belief in such practices?
Landed this video on youtube which summarizes the above article:
Posts
