Dorothy Day...a Saint?

"Don't call me a saint...I don't want to be dismissed so easily."  Dorothy Day

"We are all called to be saints. We might as well get over our bourgeois fear of the name." Dorothy Day 

I don't know of any canonization cause so controversial as that of Dorothy Day. Most static about Catholic canonization comes from those outside the Church: allegations that Pius XII was soft on Nazism; argument that Edith Stein was killed for her Jewishness, not her Catholicism; slander of Junipero Serra as a colonizer; etc. In the case of Dorothy (since I met and spoke with her, I use her first name!), there is contention within Catholic principles themselves...in house, we might say. 

Diverse Views

Within the movement she mothered, there is ambivalence. Brian Terrell, longtime friend and colleague, in The Catholic Worker, (Jan. 28, 2025) makes a very "Catholic-Worker-ish" argument: he disparages (in flaming, anarchistic, anticlerical indignation) the Vatican's Dicastery for the Causes of the Saints as wasteful, misogynist, and pious in a negative sense. He recalls how she herself was devoted to the saints and urges us all to ignore the ecclesiastical process, venerate her memory spontaneously in the manner of the early Church, and get to work in care for the poor. He reminds us that Dorothy did not like being called a saint.

Another Catholic Worker insider, Colleen Dulle, ("An inside look at Dorothy Day's contested canonization process," America December 16, 2021) notes that the cost of the initial process approached a million dollars as well as thousands of volunteer hours and aroused concerns: undue focus on abortion and promiscuity, a distortion of her into a pious woman and a distraction from her fierce social judgements. She concludes nevertheless in favor of canonization.

From a conservative position, S.V. Arrogast (in First Things, "Dorothy Day's Complicated Case for Sainthood," April 6, 2026) acknowledges her heroic virtue and extraordinary charity and generosity, but sees her stern, ideological anarchism and pacifism as contradicting established Catholic social doctrine on the authority of the state and the necessity of the just war theory and practice. Rather than encourage emulation of these disorders, he argues that she remain a "servant of God" and not advance to "venerable."

Current Status

Dorothy was declared a "Servant of God" at the local NY level and is being considered by the Vatican to become "Venerable." The first title follows thorough, expensive research to find evidence of "heroic virtue." That was completed and unanimously approved by the US Bishops. Pope Francis himself, in visiting the USA, paid homage to her virtue. The Vatican must now agree with the evidence of her virtue and influence on drawing others to God. The faithful are encouraged to honor the venerable, but they are not invoked in official liturgy. The final two steps, to beatification and canonization each require (with some exceptions) a certified miracle at each step. 

Case in Favor 

The case for her sanctity is strong: primarily, a lifetime of sacrificial service to the poor. She is not quite Mother Theresa, but about the closest one can get. (Perhaps rivaled by Catherine Doherty and Madelene del Brell.) Her wild youth should not impede as she strongly converted to live a pure, holy life. Many were influenced by her: she was not just a public activist, but a real living saint. As a gifted writer, she articulated our faith in splendid fashion. She is a kind of a down-to-earth Doctor of the Church. She lived and articulated her Catholic faith fervently, expressively; reverence for hierarchy, immersion in sacraments, devotion to Mary and the saints. Quite strikingly, in the sexual confusion that swept the political/cultural Left in the late 1960s, she remained clear and steadfast in her witness to chastity and fidelity. Her life was messy in many ways, but consistently holy after her conversion, and therefore inspirational for all dealing with life's messes.

Birth Control and Abortion

She is on the record as morally opposed to contraception and abortion. But in writing and in public she is almost completely silent about it. She clearly stated that The Catholic Worker as policy would not address the issue. This contrasts with her ferocity against capitalism, racism, and sins against charity and justice. She famously suffered an abortion but was quiet about it. In a letter to Father Daniel Berrigan she agreed with Caesar Chavez that in its use against the Afro-American and Hispanic poor, abortion/contraception amounts to genocide. This was a powerful, heartfelt statement, but a once-only. She was not a pro-life crusader. With most of the Left, she preferred to avoid this conflict. She emphasized pardon for those involved and harshly judged systems of injustice that contributed to these. When the American bishops advanced her cause to the Vatican, Cardinal George received ovation when he saw her as patron of women who have suffered abortion. Some who knew her personally insist she would have resisted such a role.  She is representative of the Catholic Left in her personal rejection but reticence and privacy, a certain feminine delicacy.

Case Against

Two strong impediments present: her ideological extremism and the loss of Catholic faith by her daughter Tamar and the grandchildren.

Yuval Levin is accurate in his diagnosis: our societal crisis is largely one of institutions. We have as a society become individualistic, isolated, dependent upon technology, and idolatrous of celebrity. Our fundamental institutions are fragmented: family, Church, local community, abiding friendships, politics, business, education, and other. To say the least, emulation of an anarchist is problematic. Each of us, in our specific places, need to patiently, slowly rebuild the institutional bonds that serve us and form us. Dorothy is a benevolent anarchist: small communities and farms and such. But she is nevertheless an anarchist. No taxes! No big government or big companies or big unions! No responsibility to self defense by force! She is significantly a bad example. Catholicism is and always will be pro-government, pro-business, pro-union and pro-just-war.

On the other hand, the Church allows a wide range of opinions in politics, policy, and ideology. Of course, a Catholic could hardly be a real Communist, Nazi, Jihadist or  (in my view, but perhaps not Dorothy's) a pro-abortion Democrat. But a Catholic can be libertarian, socialist, capitalist, and arguably an anarchist. There is no political litmus test, other than moral absolutes like the targeting of innocent life and (again in my view) the worth of incompetent human life. A serious mistake for a Catholic is the sanctification of a given ideology, of the left or of the right. In that light, we might argue that Dorothy might be elevated to Venerable with the understanding that her politics is not being sanctioned and that it is less significant than her concrete life of charity. On the other hand, so adamant was she in her anarchist/pacifist absolutism, that her elevation might implicitly approve that. My own view is that her ideology is a very significant, but not a definitive impediment to her advancement.

More troubling for me personally is the heartbreaking family narrative provided by her granddaughter Kate Hennessey in A Harsh and Dreadful Love: Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker Movement. This contrasts sharply with other biographies as it is a family-insider, an intimate, a feminine view of the close, painful relationship of Dorothy and daughter Tamar, and consequentially the 9 grandchildren.

Like many, Dorothy was involuntarily a single mother as the love-of-her-life, father of her child, Foster Batterman declined marriage and despised religion. She raised Tamar within the Catholic Worker community as she continued her exhausting public life and service of the very poor. This had complex, complicated consequences for Tamar, herself a sensitive and intelligent one, not unlike her mother. Tamar married a man who was eventually an alcoholic and closet homosexual. Dorothy remained close and supportive of Tamar, the children and even her ex-lover Foster for her entire life. But the troubling reality: Tamar and her children fell away from the Catholic Church. One granddaughter continues the legacy in activism and service; another, Kate, wrote this splendid, honest, poignant biography. 

As a Catholic father myself, this was easily the most touching biography I had ever read. Some of my family cried as they read it. We identify with the tension between an active life of service and attention to the needs of ones children. By some tragic irony, Dorothy's iconic Catholic witness did not touch the hearts of those ten closest to her. 

There is no question of blame here.  Rather, a confluence of negative dynamics: two dysfunctional fathers, her primal vocation to serve the poor, the interaction of two complex personalities. 

This is not a definite impediment. But it does cause pause. Catholic tradition is very clear on the states of life: marriage and priesthood/religious life. Dorothy was lay; not married but a mother; vowed, however implicitly, to service of the very poor. She is a Catholic anomaly.  She lived a life of extraordinary charity and virtue, but broke the norms of ordinary life. Helpfully, we have a similar case in Rose Hawthorne.

Case of Rose Hawthorne

With her customary brilliance, Patricia Snow considers the unusual, saintly case of Rose Hawthorne (First Things, "Hawthorne's Daughter" Jan. 1, 2020). She allowed her estranged husband to die alone as she cared for the destitute dying of cancer in NYC. She founded the Hawthorne Dominicans who to this day care for the very poor who are dying of this disease.  She is similar to Dorothy: she straddled both worlds, that of family life and those consecrated to care of the destitute. I can only highly recommend the article for its nuance and depth. She is another anomaly for a Catholic: how can a wife leave her husband to care for the poor. 

On March 14, 2024 Pope Francis declared Rose (in religious life Mother Mary Alphonsa) Venerable. She also came from NYC. 

If Rose can make it, why not Dorothy?

The Matriarch, Sexuality/Romance and Her Spiritual Director, Fr. Hugo

Dorothy was the Matriarch in her world, family and Catholic Worker. She was a powerful feminine force. As such she was countervailed by no comparable masculine power. Peter Maurin was her intellectual mentor and cofounder but not equal in influence. Foster was incompetent as husband and father. No one in her movement came even close to her in gravitas. Giants like Thomas Merton, Daniel Berrigan and (especially now!) Caesar Chavez seem small by comparison. 

Her legacy...anarchism, pacifism, and the amiable chaos of the Catholic Worker...reflects a femininity without the paternal, the authoritative, the orderly, the disciplined. In this, her person and legacy shows a disorder, a dysfunction, a lack of the masculine in the positive sense. 

She is the type of a woman common to Catholicism: she drastically breaks the norms of standard femininity as a super-woman of holiness, strength, intelligence, and influence. Joan of Arc, the Catherine's (Sienna, Alexandria, Genoa), Theresa's (Avila, Calcutta, Lisieux, Benedicta of the Cross), Elizabeth Seton, Chiara Lubich, Francis Cabrini, Angelica of EWTN, Katherine Drexel, Rose of Lima, and countless others. We who came up through the parochial schools knew such women as teachers and principals: fearless, firm, assertive, confident, authoritative. Each is the match of any vicar or monsignor. Such are not anti-masculine so much as feminine-strengthened-by-a-ferocious-virility-of-spirit. They naturally assume the title of "mother." 

In an insightful essay (America, "Love, Sex and Dorothy Day," October 13, 2023),my friend Stephen Adubatto notes that along with her fervent embrace of celibacy and the Catholic ethos of sex, she retained a vibrant, refreshing positivity about sexuality, the human body and romantic love. She was not one to moan about toxic masculinity. Her own femininity was fierce in its response to virility: Forester as romantic/erotic, Peter as intellectual, and finally Fr. John J. Hugo as spiritual director. As a young woman, she was dizzyingly attractive, physically and otherwise. She never lost her carnal, now chaste, zest for life.

In 1940 she made her first 8-day silent retreat with Fr. Hugo and was deeply impacted. It became the joy of her life. Recall, she had given up her lover, all her old Leftist friendships, her carefree bohemianism. She was a rigorous Catholic, a single mother, a devoted servant of the destitute. For a long time after her baptism she had no Catholic friends but was disconnected from the old gang. She lived in an emotional/spiritual desert. Her joy became the spirituality of Fr. Hugo. This was a deep, radical, old-school-Ignatian call to holiness, specifically of the laity. It provoked controversy and was slandered as Jansenist in its rigor. The retreat was hardcore Catholic; it followed a Jesuit tradition going back to DeCaussade's Abandonment to Divine Providence. It demanded self-denial: no more bingo as fundraising for pastors, no cigarette smoking. It was anti-bourgeois and ascetic. It was the strong medicine that Dorothy craved in her walk through the desert. Apparently it was solidly Catholic, similar in ways to DeLubac and the Resourcement theology of Europe. Like those theologians, Hugo was for a time sidelined but later restored. He anticipated the liturgical renewal and the Council's emphasis on the sanctity of the laity. He anticipates the deeper Catholicity of the lay renewal movements and the Communion school of theology. Dorothy returned again and again and brought everyone she could with her. 

What we read in the Hennessey biography is that this strong medicine did not sit well with adolescent Tamar. It repelled her. Such requires a certain depth and maturity of spirit. Such might be toxic for those not prepared. And so, Tamar and many others reacted negatively. It was, perhaps, imprudent of Dorothy to expect that what so inspired her was good for others. 

Throughout WWII, Fr. Hugo encouraged Dorothy's pacifism and developed a Catholic theology to explain it. And so he provided a deepened Catholic spirituality as well as a basis for her ideology. He remained for many years a friend and spiritual adviser. He may rival or even exceed Maurin in interior influence. 

As such, he assisted Dorothy in her bridal surrender to the only Man who could satisfy the yearnings of her feminine spirit: Jesus Christ, the Bridegroom. Like the female saints she so admired, her final Joy was found in the spousal surrender to the Great Lover himself. Clearly, it was only in this agapic-erotic-philial communion that she found the resilience, the energy, the patience, the joy  to love her troubled family and all the wounded that surrounded her.

 Conclusion

It is consoling that whatever the Church does about "venerable," promotion to beatification and canonization each require a miracle. So, if the Church does rule favorably, she will not move further unless heaven itself makes clear, verified moves. 

The impediments to Dorothy's advancement to "Venerable," specifically her ideological absolutism, are serious. But they are not definitive. Nor is her service of the poor, her heroic virtue, her sacrifice and generosity definitive. Rather, it is the deep interiority of her Love Affair with Christ. Her flaming femininity, her craving to love and be loved, her boundless passion was only satisfied by her spousal union with Christ. She lived this out in all the messiness of the poor. But she is first and foremost daughter of the Father and the Church, spouse of Christ, and Mother to many. 

For this reason I for one hope that she becomes "venerable."

SERVANT OF GOD, DOROTHY DAY, PRAY FOR US!