Celtic and English saints October 28
holy...@wondering.com
* St. Dorbheneus, Abbot of Iona
* St. Eadsin, Archbishop of Canterbury, England,
Who Crowned King Edward the Confessor
bob young
holy...@wondering.com wrote:
St. GERMANUS OF AUXERRE: The Patron Saint of Auxerre in
France
A Gallic prelate sent on two missions to establish a
foothold in the pagan country of England.
He started out as a noble, spending half his time studying
high matters of law and philosophy, and the rest chasing
wild animals across the countryside so he could take their
heads home to impress people.
As it happened, he hung these trophies on an enormous old
tree which, not so long ago, had been worshipped by the
common folk as the spirit of a pagan God.
This got him into quite bit of trouble.
The Bishop of Auxerre was most displeased at this
non-Christian display and chopped the tree down.
It is said the good saint was far from pleased.
Saints and gods are both the work of man. Neither would
exist without man being able to communicate using the spoken
word. It it is well established that early man had no
verbal communication capabilities, so it is safe to assume
that prior to the arrival of this milestone, gods and saints
were still something of the future - something 'yet to
happen'
Bob
Humanist, atheist, realist, sentimentalist Brit.
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor)
Man creates his gods in his own image,
then spends the rest of his life
manipulating them to his heart's content
R E L I G I O N - it is all in the mind,
an escape from life's realities and hardships,
sixty percent ritual, forty percent fantasy
holy...@wondering.com
* St. Colman of Kilmacduagh
* St. Kennera of Scotland
* St. Elfleda of Ramsey
St. Kennera (Kinnera) of Scotland, Virgin Martyr
Born in Scotland, 5th century. Saint Kennera is said to have been
educated with Saint Ursula (f.d. October 21) and Saint Regulus of Patras
(f.d. March 30). Later she became a recluse at Kirk-Kinner in Galloway,
Scotland (Benedictines, Encyclopaedia).
bob young
holy...@wondering.com wrote:
Saints and gods are both the work of man.
Neither would exist without man having the capability of communicating by
using the spoken word.
It is well established that early man had no verbal communicating skills,
so prior to this gods and saints did not exist - they were still something
of the future - something 'yet to be created'
swa...@ozemail.com.au
epistles he
wrote to the churches in parts of the Mediterranean area.
Therefore I have snipped the word 'saints' in the following:-
> * <snip>. Colman of Kilmacduagh
> * <snip> Kennera of Scotland
> * <snip>. Elfleda of Ramsey
> <snip>. Kennera (Kinnera) of Scotland, Virgin Martyr
> Born in Scotland, 5th century. <snip>t Kennera is said to have been
> educated with <snip> Ursula (f.d. October 21) and <snip> Regulus of Patras
> (f.d. March 30). Later she became a recluse at Kirk-Kinner in Galloway,
> Scotland (Benedictines, Encyclopaedia).
'Hageos' was translated as 'saints' in the Douay-Rhiems and the
Jerusalem Bible.
Hpwever, when the New Jerusalem Bible was published in 1985 the
tranlation
given was ;' God's holy ones' thus leaving the word 'saints' for the
largest number
of persons beatified by the Roman Catholic Church - a total greater
than in all
the previous centuries for canonisation ceremonies and visits by the
Pope
as a behaviour modification process of gaining new members to the RC
Church.
Easy in those circumstances to ignore all the practices and different
interpretations
that have been given by the Vatican from 310AD to 1950AD
Gladys Swager
Thommadura
> On Oct 29, 9:57 pm, holyf...@wondering.com wrote:
>> Celtic and Old English Saints 29 October
>>
> All Christians are 'saints'. as Paul named his readers in the
> epistles
So - Hitler was a christian - and is therefore a saints - since he was a
christian
So - all those priests who molested those kids are saints - since they
were christians
And - just because people "sin" does not make them something other than
a christian either!
I am sure you are happy to be among that group!
holy...@wondering.com
he wrote to the churches in parts of the Mediterranean area. Therefore I
have snipped the word 'saints' in the following:-"
Indeed all are, in St. Paul's intention, as too are those in another
intention to remember as spiritual examples in our own lives some
particular among them. The term "son of God" as used in the NT is
another example of multiple use as to whom it refers in different
contexts.
Do you in your self appointed task also remove the term from those
scores upon scores of protestant parishes who have it in their name?
Does this self appointed censorship extend to the very titles of the
gospels?
"when the New Jerusalem Bible was published in 1985 the tranlation given
was ;' God's holy ones' thus leaving the word 'saints' for the largest
number of persons beatified by the Roman Catholic Church - a total
greater than in all the previous centuries for canonisation ceremonies
and visits by the Pope as a behaviour modification process of gaining
new members to the RC Church. Easy in those circumstances to ignore all
the practices and different interpretations that have been given by the
Vatican from 310AD to 1950AD"
So you have a particular obsession about the roman church? But you
ignore, as provided you before, that at least 8 other churches,
including two protestant traditions, observe saints. All of them hold
different views and practices concerning them. For the most part those
saints in the Celtic posts are not in the roman tradition of saints as
to whom is one, how they are identified, what makes one a saint, and
what particular practices relate to them.
Celtic areas did not come under the direct authority of the roman church
until after the time period involved, around 300 to 600 or so if you
notice the dates of the lives of those saints mentioned . Not until
after 1000 or so did the roman church manage to have authority over what
is now western europe only..
With the protestant movement the more conservative among them,ex.
luthern etc., continued to observe saints while the more liberal and
especially the radicals among them did not. The rest of the world
outside the roman church in western europe only, the other 6 or so
churches in the rest of the old world, continued to observe until today
saints also but in their own non-roman manner after about 1000.
Thus as you attempt to swallow a camel and manage only a gnat for lack
of knowledge on the subject, you provide us a tempest in a teapot of
your own obsession. May I suggest you have much much more to learn
about the scope of christianity and in particular church history then is
now your command of the body of knowledge related to it? Then you would
realize that your view on the saints is severely lacking and the
obsession with rome a millstone in your grasp of the topic.
God bless.
swa...@ozemail.com.au
> "All Christians are 'saints'. as Paul named his readers in the epistles
> he wrote to the churches in parts of the Mediterranean area. Therefore I
> have snipped the word 'saints' in the following:-"
>
> Indeed all are, in St. Paul's intention, as too are those in another
> intention to remember as spiritual examples in our own lives some
> particular among them. The term "son of God" as used in the NT is
> another example of multiple use as to whom it refers in different
> contexts.
>
> Do you in your self appointed task also remove the term from those
> scores upon scores of protestant parishes who have it in their name?
> Does this self appointed censorship extend to the very titles of the
> gospels?
>
The term 'saints' has a more modern
application as the term has been brought into media usage through
the ceremonies to give 'sainthood' to certain more modern-day
recipients
that enable Papal visits and can imply a superior spirituality to
those
so honoured. Also it is an evangelising (dare I say) stunt to
encourage
membership within the Roman Catholic Church without giving all its
teachings publically. It is a movement that developed out of Vatican
II
that was preceded by a declaration for Christian Unity in 1960, and
stated in Sydney in 1982 by John Paul II as 'all you wanderers from
Rome,
return'. Protestants did not wander from Rome. Some were
excommunicated
because the refused to accept teh false teachings of the
Vatican, .some
were murdered in the Inquisitions, some chose to leave, never to
return.
In Australia Mary McKillop has been named for canonisation as
the first saint of the RC Church. .
But the first Australian saints (following New Testament usage) were
Rev Richard Johnson, the Church of England chaplain to the First
Fleet
arrived in Sydney in 1788 and all the Chrsitians who sailed with
him. ;
When the New Jerusalem Bible was published in 1985 the tranlation
given
> was ;' God's holy peoples' thus leaving the word 'saints' for the largest
> number of persons beatified by the Roman Catholic Church - a total
> greater than in all the previous centuries for canonisation ceremonies
> and visits by the Pope as a behaviour modification process of gaining
> new members to the RC Church. Easy in those circumstances to ignore all
> the practices and different interpretations that have been given by the
> Vatican from 310AD to 1950AD"
>
> So you have a particular obsession about the Roman church?
It is not an obsession. It is a search for truth and a desire that all
Christians
might come to unity of doctrine, that would mean that the Vatican and
others would
discard all false teacings in programmes more fitting for a literate
society,
> But you ignore that at least 8 other churches,
> including two protestant traditions, observe saints. All of them hold
> different views and practices concerning them.
I was not posting about them. I am aware that there are many ideas
within
the various Christian groups. When ideas are indoctrinated they come
to be
accepted as truth - some are truth; others are not. .
> For the most part those saints in the Celtic posts are not in the Roman tradition
> of saints as to whom is one, how they are identified, what makes one a saint, and
> what particular practices relate to them.
> Celtic areas did not come under the direct authority of the roman church
> until after the time period involved, around 300 to 600 or so if you
> notice the dates of the lives of those saints mentioned . Not until
> after 1000 or so did the roman church manage to have authority over what
> is now western europe only..
>
Whatever the tradition may be the exclusive use of the word 'saints'
for only
a selected number of Christians is incorrect. That was the point I was
making.
> With the protestant movement the more conservative among them,ex.
> luthern etc., continued to observe saints while the more liberal and
> especially the radicals among them did not. The rest of the world
> outside the roman church in western europe only, the other 6 or so
> churches in the rest of the old world, continued to observe until today
> saints also but in their own non-roman manner after about 1000.
>
> Thus as you attempt to swallow a camel and manage only a gnat for lack
> of knowledge on the subject, you provide us a tempest in a teapot of
> your own obsession.
I view these newsgroups as a mens to share information.
But some take it so seriously that if the information does not match
their
own the other is near-nigh declared to be 'beyond the pale'.
> Then you would realize that your view on the saints is severely lacking
There can be only one meaning for 'saints' as given from the New
Testament
and it is not for one or a few churches to give it an exclusive
meaning within
its own teachings.
Gladys Swager
Thommadura
Sorry - Gladys - but since the bible itself is BELIEF - the meaning it
gives to the word "saint" is also belief as well.
Since the word is part of our language - we can - and HAVE - assigned
it other meanings as well - and it is not up to religion to decide that
alone.
holy...@wondering.com
> scores upon scores of protestant parishes who have it in their name?
> Does this self appointed censorship extend to the very titles of the
> gospels?
""I am not in a position to do that. "
Oh, but you did not hesitate in another use of the term to censor it out
of it seems some self appointed superior position. That you should now
trim that effort is indeed correct.
"And it is not an issue here, The term 'saints' has a more modern
application as the term has been brought into media usage through the
ceremonies to give 'sainthood' to certain more modern-day recipients
that enable Papal visits and can imply a superior spirituality to those
so honoured. "
It is directly an issue here. You damn rome in one breath and in the
other declare yourself the correct source of some superior opinion. You
can not have it both ways.
The observation of saints goes back into the very early times, all your
ranting about "modern" invention and implied conspiracy notwithstanding
and in illustration of your ignorance of church history. That makes of
you an instant expert not having to be bound by the facts. "
snip
"In Australia Mary McKillop has been named for canonisation as the first
saint of the RC Church. . But the first Australian saints (following New
Testament usage) were Rev Richard Johnson, the Church of England
chaplain to the First Fleet"
And the coe one of the protestant traditions observing saints as used in
both ways until this very day . And the rest of the christian world
outside rome observing them in that very country with an entirely
different use and history of saints.
snip
""Whatever the tradition may be the exclusive use of the word 'saints'
for only a selected number of Christians is incorrect. That was the
point I was making."
And it a point of your own making and taken from your superier position
for self serving ends. Call them "macaroni" if you wish, it matters not
as to whom they are and why they serve as spiritual example to us. But
more of the self appointed tempest in a teapot it clearly is.
snip
> So you have a particular obsession about the Roman church? =A0
"It is not an obsession. It is a search for truth and a desire that all
Christians might come to unity of doctrine, that would mean that the
Vatican and others would discard all false teacings in programmes more
fitting for a literate society,"
Ah, thus poken from that superior position again one sees. The
christian world is not divided between the various protestant movement
traditions and the roman tradition alone. You continue to be blinded by
your lack of knowledge, from which position such pronouncements seem
natural to you as a result. "Literate", what is that to mean, and one
assumes you are among those being same?
> But you ignore that at least 8 other churches, including two
> protestant traditions, observe saints. =A0All of them
hold
> different views and practices concerning them. =A0
""I was not posting about them. I am aware that there are many ideas
within the various Christian groups. When ideas are indoctrinated they
come to be accepted as truth - some are truth; others are not. ."""
But I'm speaking of them in order to convey even a small bit of that
which you lack. In part in response to your obsession with the roman
church as the source from which you want to convey your strawman views
concerning saints. The truism you present applies equally to you, does
it not?
snip
"I view these newsgroups as a mens to share information. But some take
it so seriously that if the information does not match their own the
other is near-nigh declared to be 'beyond the pale'."
I wish to share information also, and do a bit of educating about the
vast scope of that which is not within your present grasp. Indeed, and
I hold up that very mirror for your own self assessment.
bob young
Thommadura wrote:
Or put another way Gladys - here's a different saint for you:
St. Thomas Aquinas:
"That the saints may enjoy their beatitude and the grace of god more
abundantly they are permitted to see the punishment of the damned in hell"
Nice Man