Two new saints were declared at the weekend. Amid euphoric scenes in Vatican Square, Pope Francis defied his modernisation drive by canonising two of his recent predecessors. The world's press indulged the occasion as one of universal joy. Even if they did regard it as barking mad, they thought it bad form to rain on someone else's parade.

Of all Catholic rituals, sanctification drips with medieval nonsense. A prospective saint is nominated, investigated by a committee and, if displaying "heroic virtues", is tested for a miracle. Since a miracle is an act of God answering a prayer, it must be medically "inexplicable", putting some pressure on the doctors concerned. Only martyrs do not need miracles for saintliness.

This leads to beatification, followed by canonisation if a second miracle is "scientifically proven" within five years of the candidate's death. Apparently the potency of saintly intercession wanes after a period. These rules can be waived if the candidate is a huge celebrity, like Mother Teresa. The committee was clearly keen on John XXIII and John Paul II, even if it seemed a trade union stitch-up for popes to move so briskly from office to sanctity. It is an echo of Britain's House of Lords.

At such times I can sympathise with intelligent Catholics. Loyal to their tribe, they wrestle with virgin birth, papal infallibility, transubstantiation and much nonsense about sex. They explain away the rituals of the church as clothing God's relationship with humans in familiar metaphors and ceremonies; some punitive, some heart-warming, like sainthood. The Congregation for the Causes of Saints – which oversees the canonisation process – should be seen as merely conducting a Vatican X Factor.

I am less indulgent. There is a notorious potency to the narratives of religious faith, throughout history a means by which elites have ruled the lives of the gullible. At a time when more death and destruction is being perpetrated in the name of religion than for many decades past, sensible people should guard against nonsense in its name, however ostensibly harmless.

Western atheists may deride what they see as authoritarian and intolerant aspects of Islam, the Hindu worship of deities in animal form, voodoo or the zanier tenets of oriental mysticism. It sees them as holding back the march of reason and civilisation, indeed of democracy and peace. The Catholic predilection for saints is the same. Religion may be a comfort to millions, to be respected as such, but it is also a menace to millions and as such deserves no respect at all.