If so, that is at once an amazing and horrible act of self-assertion — and renunciation.

you forgot to mention "crazy"

That's because I don't think it's interesting to think of it as "crazy."

People don't do things like this because they're "crazy," they do them because they're desperate for something (escape? faith?). What was in the mind of this 13 year old girl? I find it much more interesting to try and imagine her reality than to simply cast judgment and dismiss her with a word like "crazy."

Amardeep,

Baba Amte passed away a few weeks ago. He dedicated himself to the rehabilitation of people afflicted by leprosy, moving on to lead other peoples' movements in the Narmada Valley. He is the most important social worker and humanitarian to emerge from India since independence. The Nobel committee ignored him as did the GoI and India's chatterati, not one of whom ever proposed him for the Bharat Ratna. Baba Amte's life and work render awards and honors mere baubles. How is it that no one here on SM thought of honoring his memory? Baba Amte was not doing anything for faith. He was simply trying to find the courage to help the least able to live free with dignity.

The turning point in his life came one rainy evening, as Baba headed home. A huddled figure lay on the roadside. At first it seemed like a bundle of rags. But then he noticed some movement. Baba looked closer and recoiled instantly. Lying before him was a man in the last stages of leprosy. The dying man had no fingers. Maggots crawled over his naked body. Horrified by this sight, terrified of infection, Baba ran home.
But he could not run away from the self-loathing, which began to hound him. How could he have left a lonely forsaken man to lie there in the rain? So he forced himself to return and feed the man. He also put up a bamboo shed to protect him against the rain. That man, Tulshiram, died in Baba's care and irrevocably changed young Amte's life.
Baba had always thought of himself as being fearless and daring. The encounter with TuIshiram shattered this self-image. The very sight of Tulshiram filled him with an irrepressible dread. Even as he cared for the dying man this fear would not leave him:

"I have never been frightened of anything. Because I fought British tommies to save the honor of an Indian lady, Gandhiji called me 'abhay sadhak', a fearless seeker of truth. When the sweepers of Warora challenged me to clean gutters, I did so. But that same person who fought goondas and British bandits quivered in fright when he saw the living corpse of TuIshiram, no fingers, no clothes, with maggots all over."

Nice. It commences with the very first comment. That's classy. To me it's not a question of whether something is interesting or crazy, it's a question of respect. The renunciation of the world or its obligations is a common part of the narratives of Saints. From what I was taught, it seems like she lived a good and charitable life...so why be so obnoxious about her choice?

How quickly would I get tarred and feathered, if I said piercing your body and pulling heavy objects as a sign of devotion was "crazy"?

3 · jyotsana said

The Nobel committee ignored him as did the GoI and India's chatterati, not one of whom ever proposed him for the Bharat Ratna. Baba Amte's life and work render awards and honors mere baubles. How is it that no one here on SM thought of honoring his memory? Baba Amte was not doing anything for faith.

And the double-standard rears its head before I can even publish my previous comment! But first things first. Baba Amte was amazing, and our inability to post about him (due to a lack of resources on our part) shouldn't be unfairly interpreted as a statement regarding whether or not we respect him. If we don't post about something, it's not an attempt to disrespect it.

Baba Amte was not doing anything for faith.

And because this woman did, she's inferior? I wonder if the people whom she helped thought that. Why not come out and say it-- "how is it that SM posted about a Christian Saint when a heroic non-Christian was ignored?"

I agree that it's not useful or insightful to dismiss this as "crazy," but I must (respectfully) disagree with you, ANNA, when you say:

To me it's not a question of whether something is interesting or crazy, it's a question of respect.

Because I think that's just as simplistic as dismissing it as crazy -- to say, we just have to respect this and not question/dissect it at all. One shouldn't blindly respect something just because a lot of people do it or believe in it -- this gets into the familiar questions of moral relativism etc. etc. (viz.: should someone be tarred and feathered for suggesting that female circumcision is, well, perhaps not crazy because that's still not helpful, but cruel, unfair, [insert negative adjective of choice]?). Personally, I find it more enriching to subject even traditionally revered figures/practices to the scrutiny Amardeep describes in #2. It's a more humanist approach (secular or not, doesn't matter) and I suppose it appeals to me for that reason.

Self-injury to avoid a forced marriage seems rational rather than crazy. What other choices would a young woman in that time and place have had?

5 · A N N A said

And because this woman did, she's inferior? I wonder if the people whom she helped thought that. Why not come out and say it-- "how is it that SM posted about a Christian Saint when a heroic non-Christian was ignored?"

Anna, how could I say that?

In the case of Baba Amte it was an act of courage to help people afflicted with leprosy. And this after what for an anyone would be a very courageous or selfless record of achievement; he had given up a flourishing legal practice, participated in the Quit India struggles, worked with oppressed Hindus (cleaning up nightsoil with his hands). It is about how Baba Amte found fulfillment in courage. A life like Baba Amte's renders any discussion of superiority irrelevant.

Nice. It commences with the very first comment. That's classy. To me it's not a question of whether something is interesting or crazy, it's a question of respect. The renunciation of the world or its obligations is a common part of the narratives of Saints. From what I was taught, it seems like she lived a good and charitable life...so why be so obnoxious about her choice?

I just meant to say she "exhibited an element of irrationality and mental unsoundness" in burning herself for the purpose of avoiding marriage. I appreciate the fact that she was charitable, fyi.

How quickly would I get tarred and feathered, if I said piercing your body and pulling heavy objects as a sign of devotion was "crazy"?

Don't be so paranoid. I don't think any normal/reasonable person will take offence at you for saying trivial/obvious things like that!

Jyotsana,

The only difference is that we are not talking about Baba Amte in this post. I believe the purpose of allowing comments on news items was to initiate discussions on news pieces that the commenters found interesting.

I apologize if I have spoken out of place and the moderators are free to delete my comment.

All religions are fraudulent at a basic level. They are more interesting for what they say about the human need for explanation and solace than for the claims they actually make, which are risible. I actually respect the need for explanation and solace before the mystery of existence, and I think it is a grassroots longing in humanity, so I will never sneer at that, if only because at times I have felt the need for solace and consolation too.

As the most powerful single religio-political institution in the world the Vatican leads the way in this spiritual imperialism come fraudulence, but it is visible in every other religion to a greater or lesser extent. But in the context of this post, and the personal experience of a friend of mine from Liverpool, I really hope that one day the Vatican finds it in them to canonise one of the many hundreds of thousands of children who were raped and sodomised by Catholic priests, a practise that was the norm for generations, and was systematically covered up by the Catholic establishment around the world. It's not the love of God or the desire for transcendence that angers me, it's the hypocrisy and mendacity and fraudulence of clerical establishments (of all religions) that deserves to be screamed at for eternity.

6 · brownelf said

Because I think that's just as simplistic as dismissing it as crazy -- to say, we just have to respect this and not question/dissect it at all. One shouldn't blindly respect something just because a lot of people do it or believe in it

Oh, I'm so sorry if that's how it read-- I don't think there's anything wrong with questioning things, especially the way Amardeep tried to, with this post. I meant that respectful conversations don't exclude or insult people. Question away, if you can do it fairly, if that makes sense. I agree with you, demanding blind respect for something based on its popularity is illogical [the jumping off the bridge admonition comes to mind :) ]; I just want a conversation wherein we remain cognizant that for some, this is personal. That doesn't mean I support moral relativism, that means I support kindness.

.

Jyotsana, thank you so much for clarifying.

10 · umber desi said

The only difference is that we are not talking about Baba Amte in this post. I believe the purpose of allowing comments on news items was to initiate discussions on news pieces that the commenters found interesting.

That is exactly why we enabled comments there. :)

I apologize if I have spoken out of place and the moderators are free to delete my comment.

If that's out of place, I hope more of our wise regulars kindly step up and help us moderate, by leaving such useful comments. ;)

>>What was in the mind of this 13 year old girl?

Whatever is in the mind of all brainwashed teenagers.

M. Nam

Great story. But it fails to mention that Alphonse mangoes were named after her.

Amardeep: Here's my 2 cents. BBC is (if indeed that's what they claim)dead wrong saying that sister Alphonsa will be the "First Indian Saint". I would suggest they need to clarify e.g. "first indian christian catholic saint". Ancient India was very fertile with dozens of women declared as "Saint" by their contemporaries. Just to name one from Gujarat/Rajasthan border town of Mewaad - famous Mirabai was considered a "Saint".

Anna,

Thank you for the kind words.

Excellent point, YoDad. The Orthodox church in India has had one saint (Parumala Thirumeni) for quite a while now, too. :)

Wasn't aware of her till she was canonized, she totally lapped MT in the nunstakes! Was it easier to unearth miracles attributed to her because she was not in the harsh glare of publicity like MT has been, despite the fast tracking of her process by JP II?

At one level, this is a very indian story, a young women finding her path thru religion, as have many indian women from Avvaiyar to Meera Bai to Khema and so on. She certainly deserves our respect, as much as any one of her predecessors...

And, yes, even today many "different" indian women find a path in life thru religion.. we can have many diverent views about the appropriateness of this but its a reality..

But at a different level this is also the story of a authoritarian and violent institution - the office of the pope - expressing itself thru propaganda and deception. This entity has a history of extreme bigotry and hatred towards the "other" and yet arrogates itself to speak on behalf of all catholics and even all christians. It has yet to apologize or seek forgiveness for the murder of millions of animists, pagans, other christian sects, hindus and buddhists that were tortured and murdered at its hands. Its wealth and institutions are literally built out of the dead bodies of the "other" peoples. So thats certainly a problem for me.

20 · Al beruni Its wealth and institutions are literally built out of the dead bodies of the "other" peoples.

>>this is a very indian story, a young women finding her path thru religion, as have many indian women from Avvaiyar to Meera Bai to Khema and so on.

Wrong. Mirabai too had a lot of societal pressure to conform, marry and be "normal". So did Khema, Andal and hundreds of women saints. However, none of them mutilated themselves or used other violent (self-violence is violence too!) methods for their goal. Since their Bhakti came from within (and not through any preacher), they were confident in their choice and could articulate it to society to convince that their path was right.

M. Nam

Rose of Lima, a 17th century Peruvian saint, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Rose_of_Lima, was supposed to have marred her beauty for similar reasons to those of Sister Alphonse. The pressures for marriage are so extreme in some cultures that to get out it, you have to act in a way that really makes a statement. What are a few facial scars to a life she desperately didn't want that would keep her from one she desperately did want? Sort of like some people lopping off a toe to get out of military service.

As for libero's anti-Catholic fulminations..."Hundreds of thousands of molested children"? Where do you get your statistics? It's been a serious problem in recent years, but one could just as well say that hundreds of

A priest in the 1980s, at Georgetown U, I think, wrote that a problem would explode in the near future, with molestation of boys by clergy, because fewer hetero and more homosexuals (who were hiding it) were entering the priesthood. Bear in mind, before anyone goes off about homophobia, that priests are around boys far more than girls, and a person who was entering the priesthood with all the entailed requirements of carnal renunciation, and is concealing but not controlling his sexual proclivities, is probably not of a healthy psyche.

That being said, you really owe it to logic to check stats before you throw out figures like "hundreds of thousands" of molested children. If it were that many and so totally negative in its activities the Catholic church would have died out long ago.

However, none of them mutilated themselves or used other violent (self-violence is violence too!) methods for their goal.

She was escaping violence that was inflicted upon her (I think a 13 year old's marriage is nothing other than violence, i know it was in 1920s and all that, still). The fact that she chose to dedicate her life to church is nothing other than a mere personal choice. A good number of christian families in the past used to devote atleast one of their children to church - in this case at least, it *seems* to be her choice.

*smacks forehead*

Mirabai too had a lot of societal pressure to conform, marry and be "normal". So did Khema, Andal and hundreds of women saints. However, none of them mutilated themselves or used other violent (self-violence is violence too!) methods for their goal. Since their Bhakti came from within (and not through any preacher), they were confident in their choice and could articulate it to society to convince that their path was right.

Yes, devout Hindus are superior to devout Christians. Thanks for settling that theological battle.

It is sad that some of us are so miserable that we can't celebrate anyone's life without trying to push our agenda through such posts.

You folks are eulogising her. I am sympathising with her fate. I am not convinced that it was faith that made her who she was - it was coercion by organised religion.

M. Nam

nunstakes

that sounds like people riding around a race track on the backs of nuns.

Whether or not there have really been "hundreds of thousands" of children molested by priests -- and I agree that concrete statistics are helpful in any argument -- I think that this statement contains an obvious logical flaw for anyone with even a basic knowledge of history:

If it were that many and so totally negative in its activities the Catholic church would have died out long ago.

No, no, no. The Catholic church may have had as many positive effects as any other religious institution, but neither in evolution nor in human history do things die out simply because they are harmful. If a trait or institution can still perpetuate itself, it doesn't matter how harmful it is, it will survive.

ANNA: maybe that wasn't how your exhortation to be respectful came across to anyone else :-) . I read it that way only because you seemed to be saying it wasn't even a question of whether something is "interesting," so I thought you were rejecting Amardeep's approach. To me it *is* about finding an interesting way to talk about these things, and finding an interesting way requires exercising our empathy -- I strongly believe that we should always try to put ourselves in the shoes of a person who seems "crazy"/"evil"/"stupid." But it seems now that we're on the same page and it was merely a matter of wording!

You folks are eulogising her. I am sympathising with her fate. I am not convinced that it was faith that made her who she was - it was coercion by organised religion.

That's just one way of reading it. Alternatively, it might be that it was the coercion of her family in trying to marry her off that made the Church so desirable to her. Marriage coercion would be cultural, not religious.

It might be worth reminding readers that no one really knows for sure what happened. The story of intentional self-injury might not be true...

29 · Puliogre in da USA said

that sounds like people riding around a race track on the backs of nuns.

Oh, I loved "nunstakes". Though for me, it conjured up balloons and Ed McMahon holding a big check papal announcement, a la Publisher's Clearing House...

Whether or not there have really been "hundreds of thousands" of children molested by priests -- and I agree that concrete statistics are helpful in any argument

Concrete Statistics

Wikipedia link on molestation and catholic church - one can do the tally themselves, it has lot of cross links, with statistics for different countries, from multiple sources.

You can easily get a ballpark figure of reported cases.

From "Lessons in Miracles from Kerala, South India: Stories of Three 'Christian' Saints" in History of Religions, Vol. 39, No. 2, Christianity in India (Nov., 1999), pp. 150-176, which I found via JSTOR (let me know if you want it):

Alphonsa's story, as told not only by her pilgrimage pamphlets but also
by devotees, is primarily one of suffering. Official hagiography depicts
her agony as lifelong and multidimensional: she was raised by a stern foster
mother (her biological mother died shortly after Alphonsa was born),
teased by schoolchildren, and later endured serious illness throughout
most of her twelve years as a Clarist sister. Emphasized in songs sung and
accounts given by devotees are Alphonsa's later years of painful suffering,
beginning with her courageous leap into a smoldering ash pit, causing
severe bums to her legs. To resist her foster mother's attempts to arrange her
marriage, Alphonsa reportedly underwent this self-immolation in order to
make herself an unsuitable match, thus securing her future as a nun.[25] This
focus on courageous self-sacrifice and bedridden agony in Sister Alphonsa's
later life places her squarely in the most common category for female
Christian sainthood: "fortitude in illnes."[26]

note 25: A woman who deliberately burns herself as a form of resistance is a common motif
in Indian folklore. See Velchuru Narayana Rao, "Epics and Ideologies: Six Telegu Folk
Epics," in Another Harmony: New Essays on the Folklore of India, ed. A. K. Ramanujan
and Stuart Blackburn (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1986),
pp. 140-41. For a discussion of this and other ways in which Alphonsa's story resonates
with Indian motifs of female sanctity, see Dempsey, Kerala Christian Sainthood (n. 4
above).

note 26: Donald Weinstein and Rudolph Bell, Saints and Society: The Two Worlds of Western
Christendom, 1000-1700 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), p. 234.

oops! Article author is Corinne G. Dempsey.

I am not convinced that it was faith that made her who she was - it was coercion by organised religion.

Umm, in all these cases, the organization/establishment/society erected obstacles to dedicating themselves to their beliefs: in fact, in all cases, they went through severe abnegation and emotional self-torture to stay steadfast.

However, none of them mutilated themselves or used other violent (self-violence is violence too!) methods for their goal.

Fire-walking, self-piercing, angapradakshinam, walking barefoot all the way up the stone hill to Sabarimala are all popular folk traditions to express faith among some Hindus.

22 · MoorNam said

Mirabai too had a lot of societal pressure to conform, marry and be "normal". So did Khema, Andal and hundreds of women saints. However, none of them mutilated themselves or used other violent (self-violence is violence too!) methods for their goal.

Right you may be, MoorNam, about those particular saints. But given note 25 in the article I've quoted above, it would seem that Sister Alphonsa's inspiration didn't necessarily come from the Wicked West.

Excellent link Vivek, hopefully some may not be as quick to rush to judgment now.

It sounds like the intentional self-injury, true or not, is fairly marginal to her story - sure, it's dramatic, but physical acts of self-abnegation are part of the larger package of renunciation that she seems to have chosen. What's impressive to me is that she made this decision at such a young age (though choosing to dedicate oneself to a convent has, counterintuitively, been a way for women to assert their autonomy historically) and achieved the popular respect she did during a very short life. It would make a good film, actually.

There seems to be a nice crossover between her renunciation for Christ and the Hindu respect for renunciates too.

Religion is a touchy matter, and I'm a bit hesitant to comment. As Wittgenstein wrote, "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent."

But I find the process of beatification very curious. And then that makes me wonder about the purpose of the process.

First, by definition, there' no material process that can define the spiritual. Even if someone invented a fantastic machine that could detect lingering DNA vibrations and magically pull up a brain scan of the Buddha, at the very moment he was sitting under the Bodhi Tree, still, it could not tell us if he was "Enlightened" -- because that's not a material state. If it can measured, it's material, not transcendental. Similarly, it seems to me that "Being a Saint" also would be impossible to measure. (This is to be distinguished from simply "doing good actions" -- which I believe do leave an imprint...biologically, karmically, etc.)

And besides, a person is or is not saintly based on how they live their life -- they don't become more saintly the moment someone else recognizes it.

And if by "Saint" all we mean is a kind of honor, like being knighted ("Sir Francis"), then that's an institutional process -- and ultimately one that's political according to the winds of the day.

Which leads me back the original post. If this process is really a political one -- who gets recognized and when (and who doesn't) -- then I wonder what's going on by the selection of Sister Alphnsa at this time. Please do not mistake my questions as doubting her character. I'm wondering, rather, what message is being sent by others recognizing her now.

This note is not directed to anti-Catholics as an invitation to lump every conspiratorial theory together about the Vatican and some kind of world domination campaign that's now trying to sweep India.

Rather, I'm hoping someone sincere can help me understand why this is not a political process. Or if it is admittedly at least partly political, then how do believers square that with the fact that politics has less-than-saintly agendas? I'm hoping someone sincere can frame this announcement for me in a way that makes me less skeptical about the motives behind it.

Maybe Indian Christians face this kind of question all the time; but I never really get to hear their answers. I'd be really grateful to hear any here. Thanks.

Regards to all,
z

I have an Indian friend who got a hysterectomy in her twenties to avoid being forced to marry as is the custom in her particular culture and region.

A few of her friends also did not want to marry but because they did not do something as drastic, were forced.

What I mean by forced is that they were made to endure meeting after meeting with young men and their parents, also making excuse that they did not want those particular guys, hoping that eventually their families would grow tired with the routine and allow them to remain single. They did not. After a number of years of this routine they were told, "you must choose someone this year or face dire consequences". They did. They are not happy.

At the same time living alone as a single woman in their culture, town and community is not an option. Also, the taka-poisa problem is a factor as well.

Anyone else as taken with her gorgeous eyebrows as I am?

If this process is really a political one -- who gets recognized and when (and who doesn't) -- then I wonder what's going on by the selection of Sister Alphnsa at this time.

I do think that this is an inherently political process, for example, the criteria and rate of canonization is different in different periods of history based on Vatican priorities. In fact, some of the orthodox process felt that JP II was indulging in pandering and representation politics when he fast tracked the process for MT (also because both JP II and MT shared a similar mystical and piety oriented view of Christianity).

On the topic of culture-related marriage coercion / pressure:

Some Asian women in Britain are going to great lengths to fake their virginity, driven to desperation by concepts of 'honour' in a community where myths about their first sexual experience is still widely held, an Asian radio station reported.

If found to have sex before marriage, the lives of some young Asian women can be at risk and they can be driven away from their homes, experts and community workers told the BBC Asian Network documentary Like a Virgin, broadcast on Monday.

As a result, desperate young women are using fake blood and even going in for reconstructive surgery to fake their virginity, the investigative radio documentary reported.

Indo-Asian News Service via NDTV

The BBC story said something about how Sister Alphonsa was chosen over Mother Teresa partly so that she could be a "fully Indian" saint, no? Indicated it was aimed at taking the air out of those who frame Christianity as a grand foreign missionary plot.

The BBC story said something about how Sister Alphonsa was chosen over Mother Teresa partly so that she could be a "fully Indian" saint, no?

Ah, I didn't pick up on that, but it makes sense. I had read that statement just in the context of this preceding paragraph in the article:

As well as being the [first, sic] fully Indian saint - Gonsalo Garcia, declared a saint by the church in the 17th century, had a Portuguese mother - Sister Alphonsa is the first representative from the Kerala church to attain such honour within the Catholic Church.

There are some parallels with the story of Zen Buddhist nun Ryonen, who burned her face in order to be taken on as a disciple.

If it were that many and so totally negative in its activities the Catholic church would have died out long ago.

I don't know what the numbers are, but I suspect American Catholic institutions* aren't finished feeling the aftershocks of the child abuse scandals. The way people like Cardinal Law shuffled around molesting priests - I don't think the damage to the average Catholic's morale should be underestimated. I look at people like my mother, who once threatened to stop helping me pay for university when I came out as an atheist, and who now cannot bring herself to attend or donate money to the Church, on the off chance it's going into some sick priest's legal fund. The change is dramatic and, even though it's not a faith I share anymore, heartbreaking.

*I don't mean to be America-centric, that's just the only experience I can speak to.

Great story. But it fails to mention that Alphonse mangoes were named after her.

Umm as far as I know Alphonso mangoes were named for this guy (Afonso De Albuquerque.)

Nice story Anna. I was in Kerala and Chennai recently and the history of Catholicism in the south is quite long and rich.

Zacko:

Which leads me back the original post. If this process is really a political one -- who gets recognized and when (and who doesn't) -- then I wonder what's going on by the selection of Sister Alphnsa at this time.

From what I know of the canonification process, it is a long drawn process with a lot of "red-tapism" (for the lack of better word). So, in all likelihood, there may not be any conspiracy theory that you are looking for.

What I find interesting about the process, is the accent on "two miracles". Does anyone actually believe that Sister Alphonsa or Mother Teresa performed miracles (in the story-book definition of a miracle)? I am curious to know how the Vatican defines a miracle.

There are some parallels with the story of Zen Buddhist nun Ryonen, who burned her face in order to be taken on as a disciple.

Male dominated societies and religions, what they make us women go through....

What I find interesting about the process, is the accent on "two miracles". Does anyone actually believe that Sister Alphonsa or Mother Teresa performed miracles (in the story-book definition of a miracle)? I am curious to know how the Vatican defines a miracle.

Yeah, the Vatican takes this stuff very seriously and sends out a team of investigators to verify any claims of miracles. Usually, it is some type of healing. No miracle = no sainthood.

Nice story Anna. I was in Kerala and Chennai recently and the history of Catholicism in the south is quite long and rich.

Sunil, just for clarification, the post was by me, Amardeep. (Unless you're referring to specific comments by Anna...)

Great story. But it fails to mention that Alphonse mangoes were named after her.

Also, that she was so awesome that the folks in Happy Days named their coolest character after her. El-phonso = The Fonz.

A priest in the 1980s, at Georgetown U, I think, wrote that a problem would explode in the near future, with molestation of boys by clergy, because fewer hetero and more homosexuals (who were hiding it) were entering the priesthood. Bear in mind, before anyone goes off about homophobia, that priests are around boys far more than girls, and a person who was entering the priesthood with all the entailed requirements of carnal renunciation, and is concealing but not controlling his sexual proclivities, is probably not of a healthy psyche. That being said, you really owe it to logic to check stats before you throw out figures like "hundreds of thousands" of molested children. If it were that many and so totally negative in its activities the Catholic church would have died out long ago.

Look, I don't do fulmination.

OK. Tens of thousands of Catholic boys and girls systematically raped and abused for generations. Across the world. Whole parts of Catholic Ireland were a child molesting zone until recently. The Catholic Church knew about this and covered it all up. So much for holiness eh.

And yes, it happens in other religions too. That's what happens, when institutions are threatened by corruption, even the so called 'holiest' structures look away from the evil done in their territory and in their name. Have the grace to take this message with equanimity and without putting up the defence mechanisms as the Church did for so long.

Let's have a Catholic child sainted for enduring abuse at the hands of a priest. Do miracles happen to those children too?

Like the Catholic Church, The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) was rocked in the 1980s and 90s by a massive legal case regarding all the psychological and physical abuse of children admitted into their boarding schools known as "gurukulas".

Mind you, most of the teachers and staff of these various schools, the two big ones being in India - Mayapur, West Bengal and Vrindavan, Uttar Pradesh, were "celibate" males.

These celibate males were responsible for the sexual abuse and rape of boy students. However, some female teachers were accused of psychological abuse of both boy and girl students, as well as some pretty harsh beatings and weird punishments like making them eat their own vomit.

I know several people who have survived.

It is still an ongoing issue within ISKCON, though now they have established a Child Protection Office to make sure these types of things do not go on again.

I think there is a connection between repressed and frustrated sexuality and child abuse. Just my personal observation.

Pardesi Gori? Is that you?

Sorry Amardeep ... I meant to thank the author of the post. For some reason I thought it was Anna.

I'm asking this question in good faith: is a 22-year gap between beatification (1986) and canonization (2008) considered fast or slow? I know that John Paul II fast-tracked the process in 1983 with a bull, but I cannot find quantifiable data to compare how much he increased the throughput relative to what the situation was before 1983. As I understand it, one miracle gets a beatification, while two get a canonization, but I'd like to know more about why it takes 22 years to get a second attribution of a miracle. What does the investigation generally involve?

Later Day Saints:

However, some female teachers were accused of psychological abuse of both boy and girl students, as well as some pretty harsh beatings and weird punishments like making them eat their own vomit.

Varsha Sabhnani was an ISKCON member too?

What does the investigation generally involve?

Look at this page, and search for "PRESENT PROCEDURE IN CAUSES OF BEATIFICATION AND CANONIZATION". Historically, one of the important positions was that of the skeptic, or advocatus diaboli, who examines the claims of miracles critically and is expected to testify against them, although apparently that has not really been used of late. Hitchens was asked his opinions about the miracle required for MT's beatification, but felt that the process was an eyewash. He shares his opinions here with his characteristic subtlety.

I am a catholic from Kerala, now in the US. I am originally from the Bharanaganam area where she is buried and have been following her life since my childhood. BBC's comments and the article from ptr_vivek above is partly true. What really happened was that Sr. Alphonsa was forced into an arranged marriage against her pleas to let her join a monastery to become a nun. The night before her engagement, having no other alternative, she decided to dip one of her feet in an ash pit which as smoldering from par-boiling rice on the previous day. The motive was to postpone the wedding at the minimum but also she might have known that that would disfigure her legs and make her less attractive in the marriage market. But the pit was deeper than she thought and her legs went knee deep and she ended up with major burns. Later she apologized to her step-mother for taking such a drastic step. Step mother on the other hand, seeing her conviction and perseverence, relented and allowed her to join the monastery.

But it was for her virtous life and not her disfiguring of her legs that she is being made her a saint.

Incidentally, the miracles obtained by her intercession, which the Vatican accepted for her beatification and canonization are related to healing of the legs of children- two cases involved miraculous healing of children born with club foot whose feet became normal and could walk after visiting her tomb. One, a boy cured as an infant (miracle for canonization) and is 15 years old now , another is 71 years old now and was cured when he was 11 (the miracle that kicked off the whole process by the Church authorities). Both their stories are mentioned in mainstream Malayalam newspapers when news about Sr. Alphonsa is reported.

Reply to some comments above:
Sr. Alphonsa's cause was introduced in the 50s, much earlier than Mother Teresa and that is why she is a saint before Mother Teresa.

Regarding whether the cases are political- A person is declared a saint in the Church only if people in the Church want him/her to be declared a saint. If there are lots of people who want it and believe that someone is a saint then it is easier. St. Therese of Lisiuex (died 1897) was so popular that she was canonized in 25 years. Mother Teresa & John Paul II will be canonized at a fast pace because they are immensely popular. But again 2 miracles have to be confirmed after proper investigation to confrim they are authentic.

-SJ

Thanks a lot Amardeep. This post has launched dozens of responses full of sound and fury signifying nothing. To libero,the catholic church is what moby dick was to captain Ahab.

"All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Moby Dick. He piled upon the whale's white hump the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart's shell upon it."

56 · Pondatti on March 4, 2008 06:17 PM · Direct link · “Quote”(?) Pardesi Gori? Is that you?

PG, I figured you out from this gem

I have an Indian friend who got a hysterectomy in her twenties to avoid being forced to marry

I have an Indian friend who got a hysterectomy in her twenties to avoid being forced to marry

. Happily all you have to do to avoid Indian men is fly back to the states

She herself now travels all over the world, including the States, giving spiritual discourses. She is a modern day saint in our tradition.

Welcome back, lc.

I have an Indian friend who got a hysterectomy in her twenties to avoid being forced to marry

She is a modern day saint in our tradition.

PG, you too are a modern day saint in the Sepia Mutiny canon, what with your apparent lobotomy.

Meaning, the woman is respected as being "very advanced" in our spiritual practice, she is not a saint for getting a hysterectomy. She faked gyn problems so that she could get a hysterectomy so that she would be rendered "useless" on the IM3 - Indian Marriage Meat Market.

Now she's free to live her life as she pleases.

It's a shame she had to go to such extremes, but more power to her!

66 · Later Day Saints

What does that name mean (if it's not a misspelling)? I know next to nothing about Christianity, but even I know that the Mormons are "Latter-day-Saints."

What does that name mean (if it's not a misspelling)? I know next to nothing about Christianity, but even I know that the Mormons are "Latter-day-Saints."

Play on words, wonly! (and even!)

68 · Later Day Saints Play on words, wonly! (and even!)

Not to be a killjoy, but what is the "play"?

Indian marriages get a bad rap, sometimes unfairly and usually excessively. I know that there are extreme cases of dysfunctional marriages gone bad, particularly in rural areas and in some urban areas, but for the large part, they work out well for both parties. It's actually pretty inspiring to see how long marriages last and how successful they are, for the most part, in our community.

71 · Wanderer said

Why is it that we only hear about ANNA mentioning (complaints?)

Because unlike silly me, the boys accept that excessive expectations, the occasional sense of entitlement and every other annoyance are all impossible to prevent. I also run the Flickr group and until recently, our Facebook and Friendster presences. It would logically follow that I see more shit because of that.

SM is a volunteer-driven endeavor. That's not a point-of-view of mine, that is a fact. It's frustrating when people don't remember that we have day jobs or expect us to perform like a newspaper with a paid staff. That's unfair. THAT is why you hear ANNA complaining. THAT and in general, male bloggers don't get anywhere near as much abuse. People don't email Abhi weight-loss plans or call him a slut.

Anyway, that's my answer because I am hoping you are open-minded, sincere and perhaps in a peevish mood. You have no commenting history, so it's entirely possible that I just explained myself earnestly to a troll.

All religion is fairy tales for grown ups.

1 · blaufick said

If so, that is at once an amazing and horrible act of self-assertion � and renunciation.

you forgot to mention "crazy"

Isn't that what theists are?

First female Indian saint in the Roman calendar, that is. Plenty of early female Indian saints in the Oriental Orthodox calendar, though, strangely, Indian Orthodoxy has latterly confined canonisation to clergy. I must inquire of Egyptian, Ethiopian, Syrian and Armenian acquaintance what the situation is in their branches of Oriental Orthodoxy. Not much point in asking Iraqi Christians: they have other matters on their mind at the moment.

Does anyone do anything out of pure altruism? I mean, there are so many reasons people would help others: to earn praise and respect from their peers, to receive a reward in the spiritual afterlife, to add meaning to their current life, to get that addictive feeling of having helped someone (that sensation of warmth you can get in your "heart"), etc. Though most of these reasons may be subconsious, does it make it any better than someone who'd do it knowing well the (selfish) reasons they were helping others? Does it even matter as long as they're helping others?

It's a bit depressing, but I can't think of an example of someone who would do something without gaining something in return. Is it even possible?

(sorry if this is too off topic, but the post made me think of it)

Nice. It commences with the very first comment. That's classy. To me it's not a question of whether something is interesting or crazy, it's a question of respect. The renunciation of the world or its obligations is a common part of the narratives of Saints. From what I was taught, it seems like she lived a good and charitable life...so why be so obnoxious about her choice
with regards
edgar dantas
please visit my site for info on gadgets and please leave ur comments
www.gadgetworld.co.in

libero "I don't do fulmination."

If you say so.

"Let's have a Catholic child sainted for enduring abuse at the hands of a priest. Do miracles happen to those children too?"
Few official saints died as children, but all saints were children at one time, and some were sainted precisely because of what they endured from the Church's hierarchy and clergy, while remaining faithful to the basic tenets of the faith and beliefs while serving their fellow creatures. Pretty near impossible, but you see, that is why they were considered saints. That status comes from having endured to the extremity and, spiritually speaking, survived spiritually in faith. The better minded among religious people hoped that such examples will inspire society in the direction of justice.
This sort of psychology is not popular today and is considered unhealthy. It was never unique to the Catholic church. The modern mind and reality seeks more direct and efficient solutions to evil. However, fanatical atheists have caused as many problems as fanatical religious people and have brought their own set of unique horrors.
An interesting side note is that hardly any apparitions of the Virgin Mary or other saintly personages have been reported as having occurred to priests, and this is well known in Church history. Priests were never considered the last word on holiness just as presidents and senators rarely embody the spirit of pure, honest governance. Yet the idea of a pure, honest governement never dies.
OTOH, clergy were often excluded from trials because the religious confessions of the accused to the priests did not coincide with what the judges wanted to hear. There was a deep cultural assumption that a confession to a priest was the truth. That is probably not there in modern Catholicism, at least not in the U.S. or Europe. Perhaps still in India.
As someone noted, there are many Christian Indian saints preceding Sister Alphonse as the Christian faith goes back as far the apostles in India. The relationship of the church with its clergy is very complex and frought with ambiguity, no less in India than Europe.

Kush tendon: You've linked to wikipedia and in my research group I'm not allowed to take that too seriously. I'm not convinced about the "hundreds of thousands". However, I've seen statistics gathered by the FBI and DOJ, and they are bad enough. The occurrence even of hundreds is so bad that it might as well be hundreds of thousands, but Catholics do number in the hundreds of millions. During a meeting in Israel I recall that there were programs about child molestation among Orthodox hasidim. My Muslim friends have talked about how common pederasty was among certain elements of their societies. And we Indians are still living down the fevered leers of westerners who thought all good Hindu denizens of the sub-continent married small children--hundreds of millions apparently. I am not defending the honor of priests. They have to do that themselves by cleaning up their act. Problem is, you can't legislate hypocracy.

Seeing this article, Sister Alphonsa's face which had been in the musty innards of my memory came back to me. I know that I've seen her face somewhere but I don't know when or where! Perhaps I've seen her picture pasted on a believer's wall many years back (?) At least now I know her name.

This is wandering slightly off course in a discussion that seems to be petering out anyway, but I really have to say that this:

However, fanatical atheists have caused as many problems as fanatical religious people and have brought their own set of unique horrors.

is a very familiar but entirely spurious argument. I am not saying that all religious institutions haven't done some good things along with the bad, but the difference between the atrocities committed by religious institutions and the atrocities committed by atheists is that atheists do not do these things for the sake of their non-belief. The terrible things they've done, they've done because of other, unrelated convictions. There has been -- as far as I know -- no recorded case of an atheist or an atheist institution doing inhumane things solely in order to defend atheism or stand up for its tenets, or because they believe they must do these things in order to qualify as good atheists, and how could there have been? Atheism has no supposedly unifying scriptures that are nevertheless open to interpretation. You could argue that Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Sikh/etc. etc. etc. scriptures all teach good things, but that *people* interpret them in horrible, self-servings ways -- the famous "religion is good, people are bad" argument. I'm not taking issue with that, at least not here :-) . But you can't argue anything comparable about atheists because because atheism teaches nothing at all, so to say "Hey, atheists have done bad things too!" is like saying "Hey, people with freckles have done bad things too!" Um, okay. That's a neat little observation, but what's your point?

79 · shankaracharya said

Only Indian leader to nominate her for Bharat Ratna ( India's highest civilian honor) is a indian politician, Narendra Modi.

And he didn't nominate Baba Amte? Why hide, Tamil Tiger? You used several handles today, but you are none other than the Michigan-State-based felcher (35.8.204) who is in love with Modi, hates Muslims and talked a lot of shit about how your trolling was some "noble protest" against our ignoring the plight of Hindus in Malaysia. Then, when we did post about Malaysia, you didn't stop your abuse-- which means that you are nothing but a pathetic troll. In the last hour, you have

-left ten comments on this site
-vandalized the SM Flickr group
-sent me hate mail about my appearance
-and trolled my personal blog

verra pani nokku, maire.

And in the time it took to type my last comment:

Dear Anna, Just to let you know that the obsessive person who keeps e-mailing Sepia Mutiny about MODI is now trying to post on Pickled Politics under your name. This is their IP address: 35.8.204.133. We will do everything we can to delete them.

As for people who also read our cousin 'cross the pond-- now you know: it wasn't me. In fact, I'm stating it here, for the record, so everyone knows: I am not posting comments on UltraBrown, Pickled Politics or UberDesi. I can't, because I never get the opportunity to read them, not when I have to be Buffy the Troll Slayer.

41 · Later Day Saints right next door said

I have an Indian friend who got a hysterectomy in her twenties to avoid being forced to marry as is the custom in her particular culture and region..........She faked gyn problems so that she could get a hysterectomy so that she would be rendered "useless" on the IM3 - Indian Marriage Meat Market.

One wonders how one can fake gyn problems serious enough to require a hysterectomy. Advising a patient to have a hysterectomy at that age is something that isn't done lightly. Then again, she might have found a sympathetic doctor
...................

71 · A N N A said

Wanderer

Anna, I appreciate you taking the time to answer, I sincerely do. I'm not a troll. I am a LONNNGGG time reader (2004, anyone?) and I was a bit cranky last night, that much is true -- but I am genuinely interested in hearing the boys' own trials and tribulations as well. I believe part of the reason that you are so vociferously picked on is because you do actually say something about it. Not that you shouldn't! You absolutely have every right to speak up. I was just curious as to why the guys don't say anything.

Also - can I ask why my comment was deleted? I was hoping to go back and see if I had truly written a nasty comment, but unfortunately it is not there.

"But you can't argue anything comparable about atheists because because atheism teaches nothing at all"

Depends on what atheist you talk to. State mandated atheism such as that of communist Russia has been responsible for persecuting religions severely though it is not a fashionable topic. I have seen the ruins of deliberately destroyed old churches in these countries. Talk to anyone who lived through the 20th century in eastern Europe. Alexander Solenitzen might be a better one to opine on that. For a little light reading, start with the Gulag Archipelago. http://become.homeip.net/108

"...so to say "Hey, atheists have done bad things too!" is like saying "Hey, people with freckles have done bad things too!" Um, okay. That's a neat little observation, but what's your point?"

Let me be more specific. 80 years of Communisism in eastern Europe and almost as much in China. The lifting of state imposed atheism was as liberating to these societies as any separation of church and state.

Anyway, amen for Sister Alphonse. Whatever she did, she still looks quite beautiful.

I have an Indian friend who got a hysterectomy in her twenties to avoid being forced to marry as is the custom in her particular culture and region..........She faked gyn problems so that she could get a hysterectomy so that she would be rendered "useless" on the IM3 - Indian Marriage Meat Market.

One wonders how one can fake gyn problems serious enough to require a hysterectomy. Advising a patient to have a hysterectomy at that age is something that isn't done lightly. Then again, she might have found a sympathetic doctor

Actually, hysterectomies are being recommended for women who suffer from endometriosis, which is quite common and it is not hard to fake that.

verra pani nokku, maire.

verra pani nokku, maire

Ouch!

:D

Kush tendon: You've linked to wikipedia and in my research group I'm not allowed to take that too seriously. I'm not convinced about the "hundreds of thousands".

Let me inform you that most statistics reported in wikipedia articles usually are linked to citations at the bottom of the article. (and they also typically highlight when a statement is in need of a citation.) So, its very easy for you identify the authentic statements. btw, I think you would do a favor to the people in your research group by brining the above fact to their attention, as it seems like they are ignorant of this. Most people nowadays, including academics, use wikipedia fairly regularly. Crying foul on its overall credibility is a bit outdated, imho :D

Anna, ( and to an extent Abhi )

First, I would like to thank you for the great effort that y'all put into covering the hindu-indian isssues in Malaysia. Preston did a great job with those photographs and much kudos to your team effort for doing so.
Your Coverage was better than most "mainstream" media outlets.

Anna, your like an elder sister..maybe an aunt. You cover alot of issues with great effort and thankyou for your patience, passion and perspective.
Their are alot of people who have access to the msu servers and it could be one of many ppl posting on here. Cuz, Sepia Mutiny is pretty popular in Michigan. I've over heard fellow 19 year old desi's discussing your blog at the Shaw Hall cafeteria.. Thats the place you get desi food once a week too.. itz pretty good..actually its aiight.

You guys do good work. Thank you again!

Lastly, I think Tamil Tiger & Co. may have been trying send a message across to you. But perhaps he/she/them lacked the talent to do that in an effecive way. So let me give it a shot..

Vioence, Hatred, Injustice in absolute terms are unwarranted and bad for society. No religion or theology or philosphy should justify killing innocent people. The reason people like Narendra Modi become popular is a deep seated unhealed frustration of certain elements of society, who feel their idealogy, philosphy, belief system is selectively targeted.

Certain bloggers on here display vitrolic animosity for Mr.Modi, for obvious reasons. But when similar acts of cruelty towards innocent people are carried out by a man/woman or group of men/women masquerading behind the garb of theology/belief systems.. Sepia Mutiny tends to have a rather aloof outlook towards it.

This unintentional or rather intentional ( maybe i'm missing something ) approach creates frustration ti an extent
If Bush uses torture on innocent Iraqi's like u've seen in Abu Garib , If Taslima Nasreen is hounded and phyisically abused in India, if CPI-CPM leaders destroy village after village of innocent families in Nandigram,W.Bengal, If Pakistani general abuse innocent Balochistani village folk day after day, year after year, If Islamo-fascists kill innocent Thai buddhist monks in Southern Thailand, If Congolese kill their own, If the Basque seperatists kill innocent Spanish children.. etc.. we expect sepia mutiny to have an unwavering attitude to such crimes against humanity.

I know alot of these issues are outide the scope of the Southeast asian diaspore, but as India is a diverse nation and desi's are of all colors and religions. Maybe the same prism from which you see Modi should be applied to all those who are part of the same club, who comitt the same crimes, and call those folks for what they are.

Again, Maybe you folks have a particular agenda, It does not seem like. Keep up your great work. and for TT..

Love is the only way...

Go Sepia Mutiny!! Anna is the best.

Amreekan (#84): thanks, I've read the Gulag Archipelago and appreciate your keen concern for my literary development, but I don't think you're getting my point. Atheism is tangential to the atrocities you cite; it's totalitarianism that was the problem, as you accidentally pointed out yourself:

80 years of Communisism in eastern Europe and almost as much in China.

It's actually incorrect to equate even communism with totalitarianism, but I'm going to let that slide for the purposes of this argument -- I'll just say that it's even less correct, and more distressing to many, that you would equate atheism with totalitarianism. My point is just there is no unified atheist movement -- no atheism with a capital A -- that lays down atheist do's and don'ts the way the Catholic Church does -- therefore, all manner of things can be done "in the name of" the Catholic Church, but doing things "in the name of" atheism is by definition impossible.

Atheism is tangential to the atrocities you cite;

brownelf, thanks for fighting the good fight about the standard wrong pathetic strawmen that the usual faith defenders put up. Good luck getting a conversion though :)

90 · brownelf said

It's actually incorrect to equate even communism with totalitarianism

thank you, thank you - just when i think elves won't magically solve problems, you show up :) hate to point it out, but the prevalence of communism=totalitarianism view in the US is infinitely annoying. there are, of course, historical reasons for this.

89 · Nala said

Anna, your like an elder sister..maybe an aunt. You cover alot of issues with great effort and thankyou for your patience, passion and perspective...Lastly, I think Tamil Tiger & Co. may have been trying send a message across to you. But perhaps he/she/them lacked the talent to do that in an effecive way. So let me give it a shot..

Thank you so much for your comment, but do you really think someone trolling five sites in under an hour is attempting to "send a message" beyond "I want you to have a shitty day at work, so I'm making as many online messes as possible, for you to be stuck cleaning up, lest you/your site's reputation and everything you've worked your ass off for, for four years be damaged"?

If they are "trying to send a message", why single out me out, why attack me personally, when I am not even the blogger who writes about Modi? How does calling me an ugly, obese bitch register a complaint against an entire group of bloggers?

What message were they trying to send when they raged about how an innocent cancer patient who was profiled here deserved to die, because this blog had it coming for its allegedly anti-Hindu views? And what message were they conveying by bragging that they were happy such a tragedy occurred and hoping for more (cf. Facebook, for this disgusting example of hate email)?

Impersonating a blogger on other sites to misrepresent their views (after emotionally abusing them), strikes me as the work of someone who is vindictive, malicious and possibly mentally ill-- not an awkward attempt to communicate, from someone inarticulate.

You wrote some really kind words and I appreciate them; I'm not sure your resident/Michigan State troll deserves your intercession or assistance.

79 · brownelf said

But you can't argue anything comparable about atheists because because atheism teaches nothing at all

and

90 · brownelf said

My point is just there is no unified atheist movement -- no atheism with a capital A -- that lays down atheist do's and don'ts the way the Catholic Church do

This seems true to me, as far as it goes. But it's important to remember that atheism (with or without a capital A) does posit a view of the world. Atheism is *not* neutral; agnosticism is. And while it may be unusal to call atheism a religion, both atheism and religions are in the same school of thinking as religions (i.e. claiming knowledge about the existence of God). Perhaps that is why blind atheism -- and its cousin, fanatical atheism -- historically have had the potential to be as dangerous and damaging as blind religious belief.

Zacko "Perhaps that is why blind atheism -- and its cousin, fanatical atheism -- historically have had the potential to be as dangerous and damaging as blind religious belief."

Fan bases appear to be developing on this thread. Thank you Zacko. There is atheism and then there are atheists. Atheism is what you make of it.

Mr. Rahul offers "..standard wrong pathetic strawmen that the usual faith defenders put up."
You just can't bring up those old, old questions that have no final answers without getting dismissive comments. They didn't satisfy my questions when I was very young. My friend, any man is like a strawman if the wind blows hard enough.

I am not "defending" faith, an exercise in futility. Either one believes or one doesn't. I am explaining my attitude towards it.
There are many people who simply do not want to bother themselves with religion, who dismiss it as a chimera. Yet how can one's sense of one's relation with the Universe be of no influence to one's actions especially among those who seek influence over others? Of course such a belief would have influence. Atheists believe in the non-exisitence of God. An acquaintance of a non-Christian but religious background, told me his religion teaches that it is better to have no religion than to fight over religion. No argument there.

Per the veracity of Wikipedia: depends on the subject. There is a Wikipedia article on virtually everything from old tv shows to how to make pappadam to the manufacture of dynamite. They not peer reviewed in all subjects, if any, and are often laughably biased. The internet is constantly evolving, but the government agency I work in will not accept quotes taken from wikipedia until they have all been checked and verified. I tried it once.

Atheism is *not* neutral; agnosticism is. And while it may be unusal to call atheism a religion, both atheism and religions are in the same school of thinking as religions (i.e. claiming knowledge about the existence of God).

I think this misses the point. Atheism does not claim that it is neutral. However, atheism is a personal choice, organized religion is often a social or community phenomenon.

I am explaining my attitude towards it.

No, you claimed that atheism is responsible for the evils in Russia and China. That is blatantly false.

96 · Rahul said

No, you [amreekan] claimed that atheism is responsible for the evils in Russia and China. That is blatantly false.

Rahul, as I said, I think you're point is correct as far as it goes. However, I wonder, sincerely, whether totalitarian (in communist Soviet Union, China, etc.) would have been possible without mandatory atheisim. Do you think totalitarians succeed and continue, where diversity of religious belief exists? Put another way, could totalitarian revolutionaries maintain control if they weren't belief enforcers (either religious or atheistic), but instead were neutral/agnostic? I think probably not.

That's why it's important to point out, again, that atheism is n