A Topic For a Debate
With the recent delights of the Chesterton Conference fresh in our memories (well, fresh in mine... er, well, slowly melting from mine!) and also the 104th anniverary of Gilbert and Frances just passed, I think it may be a good thing to broach a nice debatable topic. I am not the orignal proposer - it has been under discussion for some time. But it may be fun to bring it up here and see what thoughts people have.
(Hmm. Note to me: another time I have to post something about the real anture of debates and arguments, which may help a lot of the silliness out here in the e-cosmos...)
The topic: the cause for sainthood for both Gilbert AND Frances Chesterton.
I could give a number of items in favour of GKC - and yes, I am told that the topic has already been brought to the attention of the relevant bishop, at least in GKC's case. (Moreover, there is also a cause started for Bishop Sheen, and from my casual glance, GKC's work plays a significant part in Sheen's writing...) But as I ponder this more and more, I think it quite in keeping with some ideas of John Paul II about examples of holy marriages...
Anyhow, this is a "audience perspiration" number (as the Beach Boys once phrased it!) So think a while, then grab the mouse, click on the comments button, and type something about your thoughts...
posted by Dr. Thursday @ 7/01/2005 01:29:00 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
OK, I'm ready to throw in some thoughts.
When I first heard of Chesterton's possible sainthood, I thought, of course.
When I first heard of Gilbert AND Frances sainthood, I thought, whoa, wait a minute, what's she got to do with anything like sainthood? But now, I think that was only because I didn't know her very well.
Since reading much more about them both, I believe it is right to jointly cannonize them. They really helped each other become who they were, depended on each other for much, including the tragedy and pain of not having children of their own, which I can only imagine was a great pain.
They led each other ever more deeply into a life of real faith, and influenced each other in ways we'll probably only guess at, or have shadowy pictures of. That they loved each other deeply is apparent, and deep, true love which becomes sacramental and is lived fully is saintly.
So, I come down on the side of YES, the Church should consider the sainthood of the married couple.
Can not say, Dr. T, as I do not know her well- but I will say that I am mightily grateful for having been introduced to Chesterton by Mr. Ahlquist on EWTN. For many, many years I've had a fascination with Sherlock Holmes and more recently, Columbo. It may stem from my childhood and love for Nancy Drew mysteries, which grew to include Agatha Christie's tales, and even some of Hitchcock's stories, altho his were a compilation of other's work. But Sherlock Holmes was fascinating, as the stories took place in an interesting era, and he could solve crimes involving real or fictional villains. There was even a real life detective who lived in, if I recall correctly, the early part of the twentieth century- William Burns- who was called "The World's Greatest Detective," the title of his biography- his sleuthing abilities compared to and declared superior to the fictional Mr. Holmes- an interesting read if you have the time. All this leading to my eventually reading up a little bit on A. Conan Doyle and being dismayed to find out that he rejected Catholicism early in life- and apparently ended up believing in, among other things, fairies. Right around the time of this disappointing revelation, along comes Chesterton and Father Brown via Dale Ahlquist- literally heaven sent. Saint with a capital "S"? I vote yea!
Faith
Post a Comment
<< Home