This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 24.226.16.47 (talk) at 21:16, 17 March 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:16, 17 March 2006 by 24.226.16.47 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Please use the archive parameter to specify the number of the next free peer review page, or replace {{Peer review}} on this page with {{subst:PR}} to find the next free page automatically. |
Celtic Language?
It says in the article that after St. Patrick was captured he began to learn "the Celtic language." It is commonly agreed among Irish historians that the Irish are not actually Celtic (e.g. the Irish learned the Celtic style of art from communication with the European mainland, etc.). So did they speak the Celt language? I defer to an expert on this one.
St. Patrick: Fact and Fiction
What are the sources for the following statments?
- 1 - "born Patricius Magonus Sucatus"
- 2 - " seems to have studied at the monastery of Lérins on the Côte d'Azur from 412 to 415 ...He spent the next 15 years at Auxerre were he became a disciple of Saint Germanus of Auxerre and was ordained possibly about 417."
- 3 - "Saint Germanus consecrated Patrick bishop about 431, and sent him to Ireland to succeed Saint Palladius, the first bishop, who had died earlier that year. "
- 4 - "There was some contact with the pope. Patrick visited Rome in 442 and 444. "
- 5 - "Popular devotion to Patrick began in France, long before Sucat received the noble title of Patricius"
These and other statments seriously mar what is otherwise a fairly good and reasonably well written article. Also the chronology implicit in them is all over the place. The fact of the matter is that no one know for sure what the dates of Patrick's life are; those of 461 (arriving in Ireland) and 491 (death) are estimates arrived at only after decades of discussion. Will whoever rewrote this article please show the basis for including these statments. Thank you. Fergananim
I've re-revised the article again in line with what I wrote above, for the simple reason that Pcassidy reverted back to his version again without citing sources for statments I take issue with. I dislike doing this unilaterally because it is against the spirit of wikipedia, but it seems I have to draw attention to this in some manner other than being polite. Fergananim, 18:52 pm, 18th April 2005.
- I did? Where? I just checked through my edits and all I can find is reverts of blatant vandalism and one weird edit (documented below). I also reverted "confession" -> "confessio" in the last two weeks or so - is this what you are referring to? - Pete C 18:11, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Hello Pete, glad to hear from you. The basic issues I have with the article as you wrote it - forgive me if I have mistaken you for another editor - are outlined above. I have no problem whatsoever with them being included in an article concerning Pat, so long as they are placed under some heading along the lines of "Speculations about St. Patrick". Because we know so very little about Patrick I really feel it is vital to seperate facts, speculation and hagiography. And - I mean no offense - much of what I have outlined above falls under the latter two categorys. Thank you for your time. Ferganaim, 22:08, 15th April 2005.
- OOokay. You have me confused with someone else, I suspect. I've no comments really re. the points of contention above, as I didn't add them. - Pete C 22:21, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, cheers. Sorry for that! Ferganaim
Most theories place St.Patrick's birthplace in Wales. - Peter
- (The above anonymously contributed without reading even the Misplaced Pages article. No consensus will ever be reached on precisely where in Romanized Britain the location vico banavem taburniae was sited. Wales is among the possibilities. --Wetman 02:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC))
Not NPOV
This article presents a great deal of speculative and controversial information as plain fact. For example, I don't believe it's remotely possible to say authoritatively that "His father was Calpornius, a deacon, son of Potitus, who was Romano-British".
- The Confessio, listed in the External links, begins "I, Patrick, a sinner, a most simple countryman, the least of all the faithful and most contemptible to many, had for father the deacon Calpurnius, son of the late Potitus, a priest, of the settlement of Bannavem Taburniae..." I'll check to make a footnote in the entry. --Wetman 11:17, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm... the article currently starts with
- Saint Patrick (circa 373 - March 17, 461) is the patron saint of Ireland. He was born around 385 in Caledonia, probably at Kilpatrick.
(emphasis added)
The last two external links give 387 to 390 as the date of birth... which of these three is correct? (I don't think "circa 373" and "around 385" are the same thing.) Lupo 14:07, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
387 to 390 sounds like circa 385 to me, so lets pick that. -- Derek Ross
Re: Dalriada According to my sources, the Irish kingdom in Co. Antrim was called Dal Riada. Irish seafarers (called Scotti) carried colonizers from that county to establish the kingdom of Dalriada in Argyll in northern Britain, in what would later become Scotland. -- Larry Gross
Big disparity with the birth dates - why is it now "circa 420s"? -- Ian Schorr
Baptist vs. Catholic POV stuff
Whatever did 192.31.106.34 do to the page tonight? Deleted legit links and added a major Baptist spin on a reasonably NPOV article? What's up with *that*?? Discussion of trans-vs-con- substantiation don't really belong in a biog. such as this. It reads like a Baptist sermon (which I'm familiar with). Recommend reversion. I've already rv'd the deleted links - that's just vandalism! Pcassidy 22:38, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Furthermore, large chunks were C&P'd from; http://www.calvaryroadbaptist.org/Article%20-%20St.%20Patrick%20A%20Baptist.htm and various other sites. Pcassidy 22:50, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I reverted it as it was basically a POV rant about how Patrick was a Baptist and all the Catholics are wrong, nyaah nyaah. Biased, preachy, irrelevant. I'm neither Catholic nor Baptist, BTW Pcassidy 14:49, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I thought Baptists were a Protestant group that originated many centuries later. What's going on? Michael Hardy 03:55, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
They argue that in fact they predate Martin Luther and Protestantism and were an underground church.GordyB 10:48, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There is currently a reference to 'Catholic Celtic church', this is extremely POV. The current Catholic church may consider Patrick a Catholic but that doesn't explain why the Pope gave the go-ahead to the Normans to invade Ireland and 'Catholicise' Ireland. The Monks of Iona refused to recognise the Catholic church as being the same as the Celtic church. Even in England the Synod of Whitby came about because the Roman church did not like the Celtic one.
As discussed above many other churches consider the Celtic church to be ancestral to their own e.g. the Anglicans / Espiscopolians (since the church was native to Britain and Ireland and not part of the see of Rome). The Celtic cross is used by the Church of England as a symbol and native Saints e.g. Aidan are seen as Anglican saints.
I think endorsement of one point of view is a bad idea and this article needs a section to discuss the different claims about St Patrick. He is somebody who is popular in Ireland with Protestants as well as Catholics.GordyB 15:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
NPOV
Could someone please clean this article up? Specifically: one way or the other, could someone with sources and citations please clear up whether or not St. Patrick killed pagans.(Anon.)
- "NPOV", so abused at Misplaced Pages, actually means "Neutral point-of-view." --Wetman 15:47, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I too would *really* like to see this cleared up. I have read that St. Patrick was responsible for the death of many pagans, and even accounts accusing him and his followers of burning pagan books and shrines. However, I do not recall any of the sources as being particularly authoritative. Given, searching online doesn't turn up a whole lot along these lines either, but that is the nature of search - so many people like St. Patrick that of course all the high ranking links will be positive. Thoughts?
categories
- would that qualify for 2 "death year" categories? I don't know wikipedia's position on unreliable death dates. (clem 20:54, 1 May 2005 (UTC))
Patron saints of Ireland
If there is no opposition, I would like to add that saint Patrick is the patron saint of Ireland, along with saint Brigit and saint Columba, as it is given as fact in patron saint. Gene.arboit 19:47, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
External links
I removed the following as essentially duplicating content in other links. ] says where links should be used, it sems to me as if there are rather too many all saying much the same thing.
- The Confession of St Patrick
- St Patrick
- Saint Patrick
- Fr. Ciaran Needham SPS, "Saint Patrick's Life"
- Evidence regarding date of birth
- The Real St. Patrick and Celtic Spirituality
Just zis Guy, you know? / AfD? 00:04, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Category: