Secular saints are people who are respected and remembered for their noble causes to other humans. Saints acknowledge that a person’s life contrasts to other’s and that one needs to identify self by contrast to others. Ambrosio (2) opines, “Saints identify selfhood primarily in relation to others, human or divine; have a covenant bond of care, concern, and responsibility whose purpose is love itself”. Saints therefore strive to make sure that the lives of human kind take course that is guided by love and care or concern. The qualities a saint possesses are therefore based on love to others.
Weil’s sainthood for instance is greatly considered based on the impersonality she advocated for in attaining justice. Burns (478) argues that Weil was against personality. He argues that though personality enables us to defend what is or what we think is rightfully ours, she considered personality as a distraction from people’s real essence. She claimed that personality, though important in showing what is just to us, does not explain what is sacred to us. What is sacred can be explained only in consideration of the impersonal. She also argued that personality is directly related to partiality and that any time we are personal, we tend to be partial in the perceptions we make (Burns 479). Weil’s arguments teach that justice does not depend on the person but the imperson. What the environment presents is more important to explaining justice than what we (the person) think since the person is always with partiality.
Martin Luther King Jr. also looked at a just society as one where everyone is considered equal. In his numerous protests, Luther advocated for racial equality and demanded that a just society could only be realized if every person could be treated as human without preference being put on the colour of the skin (Washington 4). Luther’s protests can be seen as those opposing the personality that Weil talked about. Racial injustice comes as a result of persons with the favorite skin colour being personal about their ‘rights’ hence adopting partiality in the way they treat others-the discriminated skin colour. The injustices dominate out of lack of love for others but self. The element of love, just as expressed by Weil’s thoughts, was also strongly depicted in Luther’s actions. His non-violent demonstrations for instance presented a people who are determined to fight for dignified treatment without hurting any of the human kind (Washington 12).
Mother Teresa on the other hand demonstrated love to the people she came in touch with. She advocated for people to be each other’s keeper and care giver, a course she demonstrated elaborately through the numerous humanitarian activities she did to the sick, the poor and the challenged in life (Conroy 56). Mother Teresa considered that the mission of human beings in life is to love and serve others (Conroy 55). She considered that joy must be put in everything that we do and everything we do must be with the knowledge that it is God’s call for humans to do it (Conroy 132). Based on her deeds, we can discuss with certainty that according to mother Teresa, doing what is right was by considering the impact the act would have on others and with the understanding of doing it with love.
It is also worth importance to note that, the philosophies of Weil, Luther and Mother Teresa were all build on the concern for others as well as self. Both advocated for doing to others what is right, of dignity, impersonal and out of love. All the three also based their arguments on a supreme being-God and their philosophical causes took the Christian point of view. These arguments tally the Greek philosophy, which considered justice as an impersonal thing.