Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums
M. Porcius Cato

polytheistic influence on Xtian saints?

Recommended Posts

Isn't the veneration of saints a hold-over from paganism? Seems to me that many aspects of pagan religion were simply co-opted by the Christians. In this way pagan religion is still with us in much the same way that the Pantheon is still with us (i.e., as a Christian version of the pagan form).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't the veneration of saints a hold-over from paganism? Seems to me that many aspects of pagan religion were simply co-opted by the Christians. In this way pagan religion is still with us in much the same way that the Pantheon is still with us (i.e., as a Christian version of the pagan form).

 

Absolutely, hence Patron Saints. What better way to convert the country folk than to replace their gods with equivelant saints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sts Cyril & Methodius converted a number of Slav peoples to Christianity in the mid 800's. I assume that many of these Slavs were within the Empire (Bulgarians, Macedionians). I can't cite it, so take this for what it is worth: Paganism continued to be practiced in remote places for quite a while thereafter.

 

Saints are not considered gods or spirits by Christians. They are believed to be in heaven and are prayed to because it is believed that they may intercede with God on the suppliants behalf. Originally, saints were proclaimed as such by acclamation of the people. 'The voice of the people is the voice of God.'

 

The setting of Christian celebrations to coincide with pagan celebrations may have simply been a matter of practicality.

Edited by Gaius Octavius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saints are not considered gods or spirits by Christians

 

They are not considered Gods by Christians themselves, to call them such would be blasphemy, but one can't deny they bare a striking resemblance. this link has a list of Patron Saints, Saints which are seen to have greater influence over specific occupations or areas (and are endorsed to have such by the Papacy) when prayed to. It also depends on ones definition of a god. If you define a god as a being that is immortal, and more powerfull than a mere human and possibly involved or interested in human afffairs, a saint certainly qualifies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saints are not considered gods or spirits by Christians

 

They are not considered Gods by Christians themselves, to call them such would be blasphemy, but one can't deny they bare a striking resemblance. this link has a list of Patron Saints, Saints which are seen to have greater influence over specific occupations or areas (and are endorsed to have such by the Papacy) when prayed to. It also depends on ones definition of a god. If you define a god as a being that is immortal, and more powerfull than a mere human and possibly involved or interested in human afffairs, a saint certainly qualifies.

 

The Romans prayed to their spirits and ancestors, but did not consider them gods.

An orange and a tangerine bear a 'striking resemblance', but they are not the same because of this resemblance. It is not only the Papacy that commends saints, but also the Orthodox Churches and some Protestant Churches. 'Saint' means 'holy'. Saints are defined as 'beings' who are in heaven with God and as such, may influence human affairs. Their souls are immortal, if one believes. Angels are immortal and holy. One may find similarities with pagan 'beings' but there is not an equality. Saints may not act independently of God as pagan 'beings' or gods can. The Christian God is not merely defined as immortal and powerful, but rather immortal, all powerful, all knowing, unique, etc. Saints do not have these attributes. A saint or an angel is powerful and immortal, subject to the will of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Romans prayed to their spirits and ancestors, but did not consider them gods.

An orange and a tangerine bear a 'striking resemblance', but they are not the same because of this resemblance. It is not only the Papacy that commends saints, but also the Orthodox Churches and some Protestant Churches. 'Saint' means 'holy'. Saints are defined as 'beings' who are in heaven with God and as such, may influence human affairs. Their souls are immortal, if one believes. Angels are immortal and holy. One may find similarities with pagan 'beings' but there is not an equality. Saints may not act independently of God as pagan 'beings' or gods can. The Christian God is not merely defined as immortal and powerful, but rather immortal, all powerful, all knowing, unique, etc. Saints do not have these attributes. A saint or an angel is powerful and immortal, subject to the will of God.

 

I really think the main point is that the idea of the patron saint developed as a counter to polytheism. We know that in strict definition the Saint is not a god because Catholicism is monotheistic, but the pagan origin remains. The idea of a saint being a patron of a particular earthly function is hardly strict monotheism nor is it something the christians developed on their own, completely independent of established polytheistic concepts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A saint or an angel is powerful and immortal, subject to the will of God.

 

So what? The same would have been said of any number of lesser deities, titans, nymphs, etc in the Roman pantheon. And who knows how many of these mythical personalities had historical orgins. Herakles was said to have been mortal once. What's the difference between the cult of Herakles, the cult of Augustus, or the veneration of St. Rose? Looks like the exact same system to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ave P.P. and M.P.C.:

Once again, because things are similar (remember your geometry?), that does not make them equal. If I am not, once again, in error, the early Christians did not cotton to pagan beliefs. Seems that they were fed to the lions on that account.

I am not trying to proselytize, but rather to inform (asssuming that I am correct). Personally, I feel that the most of today's preachers are nothing but a pack of racketeers. From this, it does not follow that God or saints do not exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I am not, once again, in error, the early Christians did not cotton to pagan beliefs. Seems that they were fed to the lions on that account.

Leaving aside the Hollywood idea that Christians were thrown to the lions for their private beliefs, the Christians living in Rome did cotton to many pagan beliefs and rituals for which there is absolutely no precedent in the gospels. The belief that saints intercede on behalf of mortals is one such belief. There is nothing in the teachings of Jesus or even Paul that would support this fantasy, but there it was a fantasy that many pagans had. How do you explain the veneration of saints among (many) Christians if you do not think it originated in paganism?

 

 

From this, it does not follow that God or saints do not exist.

True. There are much better reasons to deny the existence of gods and saints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am not, once again, in error, the early Christians did not cotton to pagan beliefs. Seems that they were fed to the lions on that account.

Leaving aside the Hollywood idea that Christians were thrown to the lions for their private beliefs, the Christians living in Rome did cotton to many pagan beliefs and rituals for which there is absolutely no precedent in the gospels. The belief that saints intercede on behalf of mortals is one such belief. There is nothing in the teachings of Jesus or even Paul that would support this fantasy, but there it was a fantasy that many pagans had. How do you explain the veneration of saints among (many) Christians if you do not think it originated in paganism?

 

Obviously, there could only be one explanation. Paganism!

But since Catholics seem to be the errant knaves in this thread, in addition to the Bible, may one mix in Sacred Tradition?

 

 

From this, it does not follow that God or saints do not exist.

True. There are much better reasons to deny the existence of gods and saints.

 

What is your proof? Where are your creditable evidences? (Sound familiar?) Lord! Give me a loaf of bread! B) The court waits on your pleasure. :notworthy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From this, it does not follow that God or saints do not exist.

True. There are much better reasons to deny the existence of gods and saints.

What is your proof?

 

See my comments in an earlier thread. Let's keep this to the question of whether the veneration of the saints originated in the teachings of Jesus or in the practices of contemporary Rome.

Edited by M. Porcius Cato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A blatant example of polytheistic influence on the cult of the saints comes from Ireland. Brigid, the Celtic triple goddess of fire, was considered by some to be the "foster mother" of Christ, and became a Saint upon conversion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another example of pagan aspects co-opted by Christianity can be found in the Floral Calendar, which developed during the Middle Ages.

 

The pagans often assigned specific flowers, plants, and trees to various gods as emblems of those gods. For example, the myrtle was assigned to Aphrodite, the olive to Athena, the oak to Zeus.

 

In the Middle Ages the Catholic Church began to assign the same botanical emblems to their saints, and the Floral Calendar developed as each saint's feast day became associated with a specific flower, plant, or tree. Often flowers, plants, and tree boughs were used to decorate church altars on various saints' feast days, in the same way that symbolic flowers, plants, and tree boughs were used to decorate pagan altars. In many instances where a Christian saint took on the aspects of a former local deity (such as the example of St. Brigid cited earlier by Ursus) the floral emblems associated with that pagan deity were transferred to the Christian saint.

 

For instance, in the Floral Calendar the snowdrop is assigned to February 2nd, which in the Church calendar marks the day known as the Purification of the Blessed Virgin -- also known as Candlemas Day. The beginning of February also marked the Celtic pagan purification festival of Imbolc, associated with the goddess Brigid, who also had the snowdrop as one of her emblems. In addition, St. Brigid's feast day is celebrated on February 1st by the Catholic Church (again close to the original celebration day of the pagan goddess Brigid), and the bay laurel is assigned to February 1st in the Floral Calendar. Seeing as how the pagan goddess Brigid was also a goddess of poetry, and that the ancient Greeks crowned their poets with bay leaves, it seems fitting that the bay should be associated with St. Brigid's feast day of February 1st.

 

-- Nephele

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sinnerella, there are more than 365 saints. One could very easily fit any into your examples. Tsar Nicholas II was declared a saint by the Russian Orthodox Church recently. How does he fit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Map of the Roman Empire

×