religion-msg - 6/29/08
Different medieval religions.
This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday.
This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org
I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter.
The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors.
Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s).
Mark S. Harris AKA: THLord Stefan li Rous
Stefan at florilegium.org
From: 00081503 at ysub.ysu.edu
Date: 19 Nov 91 22:22:08 GMT
Organization: Youngstown State University
Re: Parodies of religions
Greetings to all on the Rialto!
Anyone who believes that the Church did not parody itself in our period is
referred to: The Feast of Fools; A Theological Essay on Festivity and Fantasy,
by Harvey Cox, SBN 674-29525-0, Published by Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1969. The Feast of Fools is celebrated by at least
one group in either the Middle or the East, and is a thoroughly religious feast
so don't let anyone tell you that religious celebrations have no **official**
standing in the Society -- these are officially sanctioned events I speak of.
And while we're on the subject, I believe that other official events
include St. Valentine's Day and Saint Swithian's Day **who IS Saint Swithian?**
Thus, the Society,and it's members, should keep in mind that when we speak of
religious ceremonies being offensive, we are OFTEN **I can certainly not speak
for all** speaking about non-Christian religions.
Re: reincarnation again (and again and again and....)
Date: 4 Feb 92
From: samlb at optilink.UUCP (Sam Bassett)
Orthodox Christianity, at least from the 4th Century, has denounced
the idea of reincarnation as being contrary to the central teaching of the
Church -- personal redemption through Christ. (The Fundies have this one
dead right -- they are quite orthodox in their beliefs, and agree right
down the line with the early Church Fathers).
Nobody knows what Yeshua ha-Nazri, the crucified carpenter who
started this cult, believed -- there is simply no evidence whatever.
What we do have is about 4th-Century copies of the writings of
certain of his followers, testifying to what they thought they heard him
say. We have what appear to be letters from Paul, Peter, and some of the
other early Apostles, and scholarship affirms that these letters seem to be
authentic, in that they are almost certainly from the 1st Century A.D. (The
Gospel of John and Revelations, however, are VERY late 1st Century or 2nd
Other than Luke and Acts, and the letters from Paul and Peter, we
have precious little evidence of what the Church believed in the very early
years of the current era. In the period of the persecutions (A.D. ~60 to
A.D. 325, we have fragments and pieces -- which show that there were a
great variety of ideas current in the late Roman world, some of which the
writers liked and some of which they did not.
There is, as far as I am aware, no account of what was actually
believed by the whole of Christendom (with local minor variations) until
fairly late -- 5th or 6th Century. The last of the 7 Canonical Ecumenical
Councils (truly including the opinions of the whole Church, East & West)
pretty much settled what Orthodoxy meant -- Willam (err... Ake) could
probably give a date for this, since I can't.
Orthodox rhetoric likes to portray Christian belief as monolithic
and received from the mouth of Christ himself -- this is somewhat less than
the truth (or more, if you look at it as "creative embroidery") As a
matter of practical fact, we can see evidence that Christian belief has
been in a state of (gradual) flux since the earliest days. Some ideas
change, but not quickly, and not universally, and not lightly. Others seem
to be constant, but re-interpreted after a few generations, and a few (a
very few) stay constant.
The quotations presented here show _NOT NECESSARILY_ what the
Church, Christians, or even some churches believed, but evidence that
someone wrote about such-and-such a beleif, along with the interpretations
of the modern author. We, in this century, are very different people, with
very different outlooks, beliefs, and philosophies that our 1st-Century
antecedents (or even our more recent 19th-Century ones). Our
interpretations of traditional teachings need to change, but we dare not
deny and mock them entirely, at peril of losing our souls and identities
(the process of de-culturization is well documented in the anthropological
Sam'l Bassett -- System Administrator (among other silly things)
Work: DSC/Optilink, 1310-C Redwood Wy, Petaluma CA 94954; 1-707-792-7253
Home: 7 Gothic Court, Novato CA 94947; 1-415-897-7424
UUCP: uunet!optilink!samlb; Internet: samlb at well.sf.ca.us
From: waltner at inga2.acc.stolaf.edu (Wally Waltner)
Subject: Re: period vegetarianism/pacifism
Organization: St. Olaf College; Northfield, MN
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1993 01:39:24 GMT
Unto the good folk of the Rialto doth Wilhelm Dichtermann send his greetings!
jward at arizona.edu (James E Ward) writes:
>>I'm researching a persona who might have been a vegetarian and perhaps
>>a pacifist in adition that would fit into SCAdia. Can anyone give me
>>some general cultures and periods to look into? I understand the
>>Greeks were big vegetarians from time to time? What about Indian
>>cultures? Any others? Please help?
One group I haven't seen mentioned yet (disclaimer: just because I haven't
seen it doesn't mean it hasn't been posted) :) is the Anabaptists of the
early 16th century. These religous radicals were persecuted and martyred
throughout central Europe from 1525-1600. Anabaptist philosophy called for
"suffering love" which was the basis of their pacifism, and still exists in
Anabaptist groups today, including the Amish, the Quakers, and the Mennonites.
As far as vegetarianism goes, the group as a whole were not vegetarians, but
many Anabaptists were vegetarians through circumstance; being forced to
move constantly for fear of being captured by Church officials and tortured
meant that meat was a commodity that was neither portable or affordable. You
would not have much trouble finding adequate sources for research.
mka Wally Waltner
waltner at acc.stolaf.edu
From: barclayp at bragg-emh1.ARmy.MIL (CPT Peter C. Barclay/Terafan Greydragon)
Subject: St Barbara (was gunpowder)
Date: 13 Oct 1993 13:09:15 -0400
Unto the Rialto does Lord Terafan send greetings!
Someone asked for the history of St Barbara and why she is patron saint of
artillerymen and others...
Saint Barbara was the daughter of a noble who was jealous of her lover.
She was locked up in a tower for the remainder of her life. She died and her
father was killed by lightning.
Since being canonized, she has been the patron saint of those killed by
lightning and other sudden calamities. With the advent of gunpowder and the
first (crude) cannons, she became the patron saint of gunners (artillerymen).
The reason is that early cannons were very dangerous due the nature of the
gunpowder, having to light it through the fuse hole, and the metal having a
tendency to retain hot embers/sparks which would ignite the next batch of
powder as it was poured down the barrel. Early artillery was a very dangerous
job, usually more dangerous than being on the receiving end.
This is what I remember off the top of my head. I'll look tonight and
post corrections tomorrow... From a former artillery officer!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Lord Terafan Greydragon House Oeuf d'Or
Peter C. Barclay Barony of Windmaster's Hill
barclayp at bragg-emh1.army.mil Atlantia
From: cozzlab at garnet.berkeley.edu ()
Subject: Re: St Barbara (was gunpowder)
Date: 13 Oct 1993 17:39:34 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
CPT Peter C. Barclay/Terafan Greydragon <barclayp at bragg-emh1.ARmy.MIL> wrote:
> Saint Barbara was the daughter of a noble who was jealous of her lover.
Well... only if you recognize that her only lover was God.
>She was locked up in a tower for the remainder of her life. She died and her
>father was killed by lightning.
Her father was a pagan and she was a Christian. He did keep her in a
tower, with two windows in it; when she asked to have a third window
cut to symbolize the Trinity, he flew into a rage and killed her. And
_then_ he was struck down by lightning.
> Since being canonized, she has been the patron saint of those killed by
>lightning and other sudden calamities. ... and gunners (artillerymen).....
And people who deal with rockets and spacecraft (according to R.
G. K. Chesterton wrote a long poem about St. Barbara, too long for
my tastes, but it has a few good lines.
"St. Barbara for the gunnery, and God defend the right!"
Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin
From: djheydt at uclink.berkeley.edu (Dorothy J Heydt)
Subject: Re: Renaissance Religious Practices
Date: 23 Sep 1994 01:35:05 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Christopher Walden <cmwalden at bga.com> wrote:
>I am trying to determine some of the general experience and picky details
>of the day to day religious life of a Catholic in the late 16th Century.
>The country is France, and I'm not sure of the city.
>... Of specific interest is getting hold of the order of the
>Mass in Latin. ....
I can send you a photocopy of the Ordinary in Latin and the
Proper of a day of your choice. (There's a limit to how many
xeroces I can steal.) Send me your snail-mail address.
>... What were the daily, weekly, etc. practices for an
>average to devout Catholic.
Probably the Little Office of Our Lady. I believe I have a copy
of that in English somewhere. Your persona would be more likely
to have said it in Latin.
Other Offices you _might_ have said on occasion would be those of
the Cross, the Holy Ghost, The Dead ... pause to look at some
reproduced Books of Hours. That of the Duc de Berry also
includes the Hours of the Passion. That of the Master of Mary of
Burgundy has the Cross, the Virgin, and the Dead. That's all I
can lay my hands on at the moment. Mind you, those are _fifteenth_
What prayers would have been said in Latin,
>which in the vernacular.
You would probably have said the Rosary in the vernacular, as
well as many incidental little prayers to your favorite saints.
Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin Dorothy J. Heydt
Mists/Mists/West UC Berkeley
Argent, a cross forme'e sable djheydt at uclink.berkeley.edu
PRO DEO ET REGE
From: Phyllis_Gilmore at rand.org (Phyllis Gilmore)
Subject: Re: Renaissance Religious
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 13:59:16 GMT
archmonk at news.gate.net (John W. Missing) wrote:
> . . .
>Since religion of all periods and places is my
>perpetual subject, Iwould welcome this information.
> . . .
Very well, Father. Here's the citation:
Duffy, Eamon, _The Stripping of the Altars:
Traditional Religion in England c.1400-c.1580,
New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1992.
From the Contents:
I. The Structures of Traditional Religion
A. Liturgy, Learning and the Laity
1. Seasons and Signs: The Liturgical Year
2. How the Plowman Learned His Paternoster
B. Encountering the Holy
3. The Mass
4. Corporate Christians
5. The Saints
C. Prayers and Spells
6. "Lewed and Learned": the Laity and the Primers
7. The Devotions of the Primers
8. Charms, Pardons and Promises: Lay Piety and
"Supersition" in the Primers
D. Now, and at the Hour of Our Death
9. Last Things
10. The Pains of Purgatory
II. The Stripping of the Altars, 1530-1580
11. The Attack on Traditional Religion I: From
the break with rome to the Act of Six Articles
12. The Attack . . . II: To the Death of Henry VIII
13. The Attack . . . III: The Reign of Edward VI
14. The Impact of Reform: Parishes
15. The Impact of Reform: Wills
Thank God for the scholarly press! Now if I only get time
to read this one and the umpteem other good things I bought
SCA: Philippa de Ecosse, Lyondemere, Caid
mka: Phyllis Gilmore, Santa Monica and Torrance, CA
From: proberts at castle.ed.ac.uk (P Roberts)
Subject: Re: Catholic Mass c. 1000?
Organization: Edinburgh University
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 1994 22:57:25 GMT
The Tridentine Mass was codified at the Council of Trent in
1538 (I think) and was used by the Roman Catholic Church until Vatican
II (10-20 years ago?). The Council of Trent was called to try and
counter the reformation and to ensure orthodoxy within the Catholic
Church. The Tridentine Mass was collected together from various
different masses that were celebrated at that time (e.g. I believe that
the starting psalm, 42?, and the closing of the mass with the first
chapter of St John's Gospel were Dominican traditions) so its component
parts are actually considerably older than 1538.
From: archmonk at news.gate.net (John W. Missing)
Subject: Re: Catholic Mass c. 1000
Date: 9 Oct 1994 19:46:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Catholic Mass c. 1000?
M>In article <36lc83$3f0 at newsbf01.news.aol.com>
M>nikolai3 at aol.com (Nikolai3) writes:
M>>I just found this item on the Orthodox mailing list. As soon as I get the
M>>address I'll pass it along.
M>>" From: Norman H Redington <redingtn at MIT.EDU>
M>>Subject: Re: Western Saints
M>>My wife Karen Keck, an Orthodox mediaeval scholar, is preparing
M>>a book-length study on the pre-Schism church in southern Germany,
M>An interesting point is made here. the pre-Schism church was not
M>referred to as "Catholic" or "Orthodox". The Church of Peter and Paul
M>eventually became the "Roman" church. I would suggest (as a practicing
M>Orthodox Christian) that there was no difference in that time, among the
M>liturgical offerings in the church.
M>Even if there was, I would suggest that you might use the liturgy of
M>St. John Chrysostum(sp). This is the liturgy still served today in our
M>church and is, I believe unchanged since 988.
This would be totally inappropriate. At this early stage there were
still multiple local liturgies. The liturgies of St. John Chrysostom
and St. Basil were used primarily within the Byzantine Empire. The
Liturgy of St. Mark was used in Egypt and Ethiopia (Abbysinia). The
Liturgies of St. Germain and St. John Cassian were used in France
(Gaul). The Sarum Rite was used in the region of England around
Salisbury. Italy had the Liturgies of St. Peter, St.Ambrose, and St.
Clement. The world had not been reduced to uniformity with only one
liturgy in the West and two in the East
M>Anyone out there know more than a humble Christian?
M>>Or I suppose you could email him yourself! :-)
M>>Nikolai Kyrilovich (in monasticism Seraphim Chrysostom)
M>>MUNDANE: Kevin-Nikolai Payne
M>>nikolai3 at aol.com
M>>"Domnhal MacDaniel come home, come home!"
M>MARK WILLIAMS, EDP SYSTEMS AUDITOR
M>British Columbia Ministry of Health
Î sinful monk Diormid, priest. rka Father Joseph mka John Missing Î
From: archmonk at news.gate.net (John W. Missing)
Subject: Re: Catholic Mass c. 1000
Date: 9 Oct 1994 19:47:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Catholic Mass c. 1000?
T>In article <36h0c4$8o8 at usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, ej613 at cleveland.Freenet.Edu
T>(Maureen S. O'Brien) writes:
T>"I have an Irish persona from about the year 1000. I know this
T>is after the Roman Easter date was accepted, and that the psalm-
T>type rosary was used, but I haven't been able to find any
T>books which include the old Salisbury and other liturgies."
T>Gee, if I were still doing SCA, I could have answered this....
Well, I can answer this with a quote from e-mail I received from the
source of such books:
If you would like a trade list of our St. Hilarion Press, which was
founded to restore a complete set of service books for Orthodox Western Rite,
based on the Old Sarum rite, please do forward me your address. A brief
- Sarum Mass Book
- Prayer Book
- Chant Ordinarium (Kyriale, with petitions on Kyries; Latin-English)
- Westminster Benedictional
- 1994 St. Hilarion Calendar (all W. Orthodox Saints known)
- Fasts and Feasts in the W. Rite Churches
- Questions of Faith & Ethics: An Orthodox Response
I wish you well in everything and I look forward to your reply.
Yours in Christ,
Hieromonk Aidan, a sinner
St. Hilarion Monastery - New Amalfion
Synod of Orth. Bishops of the W. Rite
1905 S. 3rd, Austin, TX 78704-4122 512/442-2289 fax 512/416-6556
Additionally, I am working on translating a 7th Century source for the
Celtic Liturgy and am staying in touch with other work in this field.
I may be able to come up with better Celtic sources later.
Î sinful monk Diormid, priest. rka Father Joseph mka John Missing Î
From: scale at primenet.com (Luis M. Outumuro Sr.)
Subject: Re: Wheelchairs in period
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 05:52:30 MST
shafer at ferhino.dfrc.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes:
>Just as an interesting sidelight, handicapped people could not, in
>period, be ordained in the Church. No well-to-do families palming off
>their "imperfect" children on Mother Church; candidates for the
>priesthood and for religious orders had to have all their limbs in
>working order and all their senses. The reason? Religious,
>particularly priests, represent Christ on earth or Christ's "brides"
>and it would be sacreligious if that person were "imperfect". It was
>possible to ship such a person off to a religious house, but as
>endowed guests, not members. More astute families assured that the
>endowment returned to the family with the death of the guest.
Well... "the Church" still has a problem with the disabled. The local
Catholic church refused to marry my fiancee and I... unless I could prove
that I was capable of fathering a child. Needless to say (but I'll say it
anyway!), we got married at the California Country Club by a
non-denominational reverend. Ciao...
From: angel at unix.tpe.com (angel)
Subject: Sources for Early Church, was Re: Christian misundersta
Date: 10 May 1996 08:30:13 -0400
Organization: TPE, Washington DC
SJB <SJBoley at switch.com> wrote:
>This has been quite educational and quite fun. Wonder where I can
>get a book on the early church....?
>DeinBruder Alaric Von Konigsberg
The one single book I've found most educational has been "Early Christian
Doctrines" by J.N.D. Kelly (ISBN 06-064334-X). It outlines the first
five centuries of Christian doctrinal development. Another (shorter)
work is "The History of Christian Doctrines" by Louis Berkhof (ISBN
If you are interested in reading the Early Fathers themselves, Henry
Bettenson has two books, "The Early Christian Fathers", ISBN 0-19-283009-0
(from St. Clement of Rome to St. Athanasius), and "The Later Christian
Fathers", ISBN 0-19-283012-0 (from St. Cyril of Jerusalem to St. Leo the
Great). These books provide exerpts from the patristic writings, with
some background explanation. (If you really get into the patristic
period, there is a set of books by Lightfoot that has all of the writings,
but I understand it's quite an investment of money.) I bought the Early
and Later Fathers books at Borders for about $15.00 each (they are
Another fun book for such discussions is "Documents of the Christian
Church", also edited by Henry Bettenson (no ISBN found, but it's Oxford
University Press). It has,in Section 1, references to Christianity found in
non-Christian sources, including how the Roman law dealt with Christians
(or at least, what the law said). In Section 2 it traces the Apostles'
Creed and the Nicene Creed, and shows the precursors to both. It mentions
a number of different heresies, and follows the debates back and forth.
In Part Two, the book shows exerpts from church and state documents
describing how it interacts (or was supposed to interact) with the Empire,
and discusses heresy, monasticism, ect. It has included excerpts from
documents on: Charlemagne and Education, the final breach between Eastern
and Western churches, the letter of the synod of Worms to Gregory VII,
January 1076, Innocent III on empire and papacy, the Bull "Unam Sanctam,"
1302, and the Rules of St. Benedict and St. Francis. It also includes
the episcopal inquisition and the secular arm, and the justification of
the inquisition. It touches on Scholasticism (Anselm and Aquinas),
William the Conqueror's refusal of fealty to the Pope, the Pope's
Interdict on England, 1208, the church clauses of the Magna Carta, 1214,
and includes documents on Wycliffe and the Lollards. Then it gets into
the reformation (and includes the 95 Theses of Luther, 1517). All in all,
it's a pretty informative book, and only costs about $11.00 at Borders.
I hope this answers your question on books about the early Christian
Church. I've found these books to be enlightening, as well as great
fodder for discussions.
Incipient Shire of Roxbury
Kingdom of Atlantia
From: Morgoth <morgoth at nome.net>
Subject: Religious Historical Persons Webpage/more.
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 08:01:03 -0700
Found an interesting web page. It is a primarily catholic one,
but it has alot of info on different historical (medieval and
more, such as St. Thomas Aquanas Summa Theologica, and some basic
personnel info and philosphy).
Frater Morgoth, Cyberabbey of St. Cyril
Subject: ANST - Paganism after 600 A.D.
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 98 14:47:31 MST
From: "Kendall Johnson" <avalon at netjava.com>
To: <ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG>
>On Fri, 16 Jan 1998, Kendall Johnson <avalon at netjava.com> wrote:
>> [Daniel de Lincolia wrote:]
>> >All I'm saying is that, if you want to be an authentically
>> >historical person of a Celtic race after 600 AD or so, you'd
>> >say you were Christian. Before that, it depends where,
>> >when, and how.
>> This is a very argueable date because Charlemagne didn't
>> start forcing christianity upon the Northwestern parts of
>> europe until the early 800's
>Um, I wrote "Celtic race". The only people we'd call Celts
>that Charlemagne may have ruled was Brittany,
Let me say it this way. While Charlemagne was "converting" the northwestern
part of Europe in the 800's the Brittish Isles were developing seperately.
The point I was trying to make is that it isn't before 600 A.D. that would
deside when and where a Celt would live, but after.
In the majority of cases a person claiming a "celtic" persona would hale
from the western or northern parts of the Brittish Isles. Although a person
claiming a "pagan" persona could hale from anywhere in the Brittish Isles
after the Angles, Saxons, and others came over in roughly 450 A.D. with them
they brought their religions
and until well after the conquest of William there was no single religion
on the Brittish Isles. Though after King Oswy of Northumbria converts to
Roman Christianity in 664 Christianity was dominate. However It is recorded
that King Edwin was killed shortly after converting to Christianity in the
early 600's by King Penda of Mercia who was pagan. I have no idea how long
Penda reigned and if he later converted or not, but this shows that after
600 A.D. there were pagans on the Brittish Isles.
>I have the book _William the Conqueror_ (that's the name on
>the spine; you may call him what you will), David C. Douglas
>(Univ. of California Press, Berkeley, 1964). I don't have
>time to re-read it, but Chapter 13 starts with "William, as
>king, showed himself resolute not only to retain his royal
>rights in the Church, but also to discharge what he
>conceived to be his ecclesiatical duties. ... [he] and all
>his subjects both Norman and English, lived in a world in
>which the Church was recognized as an all-embracing unit
>..." The monastaries of Normandy were famous, and they
>spread the revival to England (not by founding many more,
>but by reforming the ones there). William moved
>ecclesiastical pleas from the hundred courts to the bishops'
>courts. He had many ecclesiastical councils held to reform
>the church. There is dispute reported there about whether
>the English Church needed outside reform, but measures were
>taken against married priests and bishops.
I agree that paganism on the Brittish Isles was on the decline, but for
several more centuries there were outcrops of paganism such as the invading
Norse (though they were not celtic).
>I would therefore like to ask how you know "the christian
>religion was not strictly enforced on all parts of the
You said yourself that William didn't conquer all of Brittan.
>I suspect it wasn't strictly enforced because well-nigh
>everyone was Christian or thought themselves so;
>you don't have to enforce a universal.
A seperate point, but why were laws being made by the monarchs in England
until the 1700's requiring people to go to church or face a fine.
>I have seen no mention of paganism in
>England post-Conquest, and I've mentioned some pre-Conquest
Post-conquest England, Scotland,etc. would not have been seriously bothered
by internal paganism, but would have seen small uprisings via invasion from
outside sources. ie Vikings
To summarize the Brittish Isles could have been home to Pagans after 600
A.D. and continental Europe definetly was.
For more sources Check:
The Emergence of Catholic Tradition 100 - 600 A.D. by Jaroslav Pelikan publ.
University of Chicago Press
The Medieval Church by Joseph H. Lynch publ. by Longmand Group
The Age of Reform 1250 -1550: An intellectual and Religious History of Late
Medieval and Reformation Europe by Steven Ozment publ. by Yale University
The Face of Europe by Peter n Stearns publ. Forum Press
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 09:35:55 -0500
From: Kay Loidolt <mmkl at indy.net>
Subject: SC - Pagan dieties vs. Christain Saints/ religious anthropology
Johann von Metten writes:
By education and profession I'm a anthropologist and a Church
historian. (I hold a Masters in both)
There is often a lot of confusion regarding 'pagan' god(esses) being
'made' into christian saints. In the case of not only Brigid, but also
Thor, Frieda and Lugh, there are several saints called by these
undeniable pre-christian names!! How? Why? The average person without
study, may indeed simply ascribe this to " the church is simply taking
over old practices". Well, humans being who and what they are
(regardless of what we may think they are the same the world around)
We name our children after our ancestors and/or heroes, all of the above
names were common roots and elements of human names.
As Christianity came into contact with other cultures the new converts
brought their own names into the new Chistian context. Remember, all
'christian names' were of another culture at one point, Greek, Roman,
Celtic, etc..., the only culture this is not true of is possibly Jewish
from which Christianity sprung to begin with.
Now I grant you that there IS some coincedence between one of the
three Saint Brigids and the pagan goddess/heroine. However, we do have a
goodly amount of documentation around the one's life and death, enough
to separate the two images. That they should share the same 'miracles'
should really mean nothing as saints do often perform miracles, the
difference being concerning the how and whys of the miracles. Even if
the common people blend the two observances, should not impune that
"the Church" does.
Contrary to popular belief the Church has never been a truly
monolithic structure, as much as we would want it to be for various
reasons. The Church may strive for unity, but achieving it has always
evaded us, human unity and divine unity being two different things?
For a seemingly male dominated organization it is a common saying that
the real power in the church are the 'blue-hairs', old women who have no
fear of bishops or priests, but merely 'handle' them to achieve what
must be done!!
Pope St. Gregaory the Great was the first to approve that 'those
customs to which the people were attached before coming to the true
faith may be continued if they are wholesome and may be seen in the
light of the gospel'. Thus approving such non-mediterranean ideas as All
Saints Day/Samhain and quaterly rogation days.
It cannot be emphasized enough that 'Christianity' itself has no
culture, it is like salt or yeast, an ingredient which transforms those
dishes, cultures, it comes in contact with.
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 13:45:31 -0500
From: "Decker, Terry D." <TerryD at Health.State.OK.US>
Subject: RE: SC - Holy Feast and Holy Fast
> Perhaps they were not ROMAN christians, but IIRC, the Hebrides, Ionia, and
> a lot of Ireland were operating under the "Celtic church", and many remained
> that way well after Patrick and Columcille brought the Roman church to the
> British isles.
The Celtic Church was founded in the late 2nd or early 3rd Century and was
structured so that local parishes and abbeys were under the rule of their
local bishop or abbot rather than centrally controlled as in the Roman
Church. It was widely expanded in the 5th Century by St. Ninian, St.
Dyfrig, and St. Patrick.
In 597, Rome sent St. Augustine of Canterbury (feast - MAy 27; May 26 in
England and Wales) to the Isles to bring the Celtic Church back into the
fold. He established the Roman rule in England by converting the
Anglo-saxon king, Aethelbert.
The differences between the Celtic and Roman Churches were settled at the
Synod of Whitby in 663 and the Celtic Church was integrated into the Roman
Church, but not without some people thinking the Celts got the short end of
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 19:14:56 -0400
From: Irene leNoir <irene at ici.net>
To: <sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu>
Subject: Re: rosewood
>Does anyone know if rosewood was used for crosses anywhere
I can't say for sure that it was, but based on my research into rosaries
(which focuses on late 14th/early 15th century Europe), I would say that
it is a very appropriate choice. Roses were very symbolically linked
with the concept of the Virgin and Child, and from there the rosary.
>From there, it really doesn't seem a stretch to form a link to a plain
SCA: Irene leNoir
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 08:47:43 -0600
From: "Michael F. Gunter" <michael.gunter at fnc.fujitsu.com>
Subject: SC - non-member submission - Re: sca-cooks V1 #2797
An interesting bit of ecclesiastical trivia pertaining to Patrick and
Patrick in his own biography tells us that his father was a deacon and
his grandfather, a priest. This was not at all uncommon among the rural
and even sub urban clergy in the centuries before the pontificate of
Innocent the III.
However, when Patrick returns to Europe and home, he goes to Rome to
seek direction, and is sent to study, NOT in Rome with Roman monks, but
with Greek monks living in Ravenna!! It is from Ravenna that Patrick
goes forth, via Rome for permission and funds, but it is Greek monks
that he takes with him!
Hence the first brand of Christianity which the Irish recieved was not
Roman or Latin, but Greek!!
This can give us a great deal in the way of clues as to how early Irish
adapted to Christianity and vice verse!
The fasting customs of the Greek church are reflected in the great
ascetic traditions of the Celtic Church. As is many of the prayers and
reverence given Creation and humans Responsability towards the earth!
This also explains why the great gospel books were usually written in
Greek with Latin letters!!
Yes, Patrick was a Briton/Breton by birth and a Roman by family status,
but by ecclesiastical rite, I'd say he was probably a Greek/Byzantine!
Many of the extant Celtic rituals seem descendant right from the Liturgy
of St.John Crysostom and even earlier, of St. James of Jerusalem, two of
the oldest liturgies found in Christianity!
M.A Church History, Social Anthropology
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:03:09 -0600
From: "Decker, Terry D." <TerryD at Health.State.OK.US>
Subject: SC - OT - Celtic Church
According to Gildas, Christianity came to the Isles with Joseph of Aramithea
in the last year of Tiberius' reign (approx. 37 CE), although the Celtic
Church doesn't appear to come into existence until the 2nd Century. It is
very possible that the Celtic Church is an off-shoot of Orthodoxy via the
Galatians, the Eastern-most of the Celtic peoples in 1st Century CE.
Patrick may have been sent to Ravenna, because he was already of the
Orthodox branch of Christianity and at the time the schism between the
Eastern and Western Churches was just beginning. The formal split is in
1054 when Pope Leo IX excommunicates the patriarch of Constantinople,
From: karen moon [karenmoon at msn.com]
Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 8:08 PM
To: ansteorra at ansteorra.org
Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Period Religious Jewelery -- Or Maybe Not!
In like manner of Mistress Mari's answer of things that "might have been"
jewelry of religious nature; many amulets made from antler points and/or
antler crowns (the part where it flares out and attached to the head) have
been found in digs in Northern Europe, Scandinavia, and the Britannic Isles.
Many of those found have been either incised (scrimshaw is the post period
term for this art) or carved in very basic base relief with geometric
patterns, including allot of dots and circles. Beads made of antler were
also found decorated in this fashion.
Although it is not known for sure wether or not these amulets were truly of
religious nature it is a distinct possibility.
Master Darius of the Bells, OL
Darius brings up a good point -- Are amulets considered religious? Many scholars make quite the point of separating magic from religion and place amulets, talismans and other "protective" (superstitious) paraphernalia in a different research bin from "religious" jewelry. (So which bin does a St. Christopher medal go in?)
Some amulets may well have been religious. Others .... might be a stretch to call them such. Phallus amulets, for instance, were wildly popular with the Romans. They were apparently hung on children and animals to ward off disease, they were incised into buildings as a charm to keep them from falling down or to keep burglars away, they even fashioned lamps in the shape of phalluses. Most every garden had it's guardian Priapus, a stone or wooden statue of the self-same god, who sported quite the masculine member. Their ubiquity in Roman areas might even suggest the Romans worshipped phalluses. Happily, the Romans were literate and left many records, so we know they didn't worship phalluses (per se) and didn't even have a god of phalluses (Priapus notwithstanding...) Other protective amulets were eyes -- painted on the sides of ships, melted into glass "eye" beads -- all meant to turn the "evil eye" and ward off bad luck.
This brief tangent is only meant to suggest that -- without further evidence or research -- a piece of jewelry might or might not be an amulet, and an amulet might or might not have religious significance.
Mari ferch Rathyen
annoying people with research since at least 1986....
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 19:05:37 -0500
From: Johnna Holloway <johnna at sitka.engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Re: Lenten fasting
To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>
Online one can start with and read the online version of the
1913 edition of the New Catholic Encyclopedia
The article on Lent is long and is loaded with links to keep
you busy throughout the entire Lenten season.
http://www.newadvent.org/almanac/ lists a number of other sites
that are linked to New Advent.
http://www.catholicculture.org/ is another place for information on
feast days and Lenten customs.
http://www.oca.org/ is the website of the Orthodox Church in America.
http://www.goarch.org/ is the website of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese
of America, Department of Internet Ministries.
There are thousands of these sites online.
As for a book on the topic you might want to take a look at:
Passover and Easter : origin and history to modern times / edited by
Paul F. Bradshaw and Lawrence A. Hoffman.
Notre Dame, Ind. : University of Notre Dame Press, c1999.
vii, 252 p. It's catalogued under Easter--History.
Johnnae llyn Lewis
> While we're on the topic, does anyone know of a timeline or a history that
> would show the development of the various rituals in the Catholic and
> Orthodox churches? I mean, I'm sure, at the first Easter, JC didn't gather
> his apostles and say, "Hey guys, since I'm going to be crucified and
> resurrected in 40 days, here's what I want you to do" and lay out a Lenten
> diet schedule.
> All of the Christian rituals came from somewhere- I'd be interested in
> picking up a bit more about when and where.
Date: hu, 19 Aug 2004 08:35:11 -0500
From: "Terry Decker" <t.d.decker at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Seeking bread recipe
To: "Cooks within the SCA" <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>
>I have a friend who is seeking to recreate ancient greek bread dildos.
>Anyone got any ideas?
Rather than "dildos," try "false phalluses." Bread phalluses ("obeliai" -
spit-like things) were carried by the "obeliaphoroi" in the grand procession
as offerings to Dionysus during Dionysia. Similar bread phallues may have
been worn or eaten during Dionysia, but I doubt they were used in the manner
suggested by "dildo."
I haven't seen a recipe for these, but I speculate they would have been a
leavened bread of wheat or a mixture of wheat and barley, as a baer would
like to have his members swell. One needs to remember this is a male
fertility god, who can whither your penis if he is displeased, so a good
rise would probably be a pleasing occurence. A standard bread recipe of
flour, water, salt and yeast would probably suffice, if you can't find an
Also present at these festivals were "plakon," small cakes and pastries made
with spices, honey and cream cheese, in the shape of phalluses. Similar
cakes in the shape of female genitalia and breasts appear in relation to the
worship of Persephone and Aphrodite.
The sites listed below provide a little more information about Dionysia for
Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 01:29:53 -0500
From: "Lisa" <silvina at allegiance.tv>
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Harvest times
To: "Cooks within the SCA" <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>
I honestly don't remember the reasoning for only bread being given during
communion to laity, but I do know that it does go back to medieval times. I
THINK that communion in both forms was reserved for the clergy due to their
"greater holiness and greater ability to experience the full communion with
christ," but that was one of hte changes that was made with Vatican 2, the
pop didn't believe that anyone was any more holy or better able to
experience full communion with christ, regardless of their status as either
clergy or laity, as many saints were not at any point in their lives clergy.
There are still places that refuse to give the sacrament in both forms, but
those areas also tend to refuse to accept the majority of the changes made
with Vatican 2.
Elizabeta of Rundel
> As a former Catholic, I can answer this one. It depends on whether you're
> talking pre or post vatican 2.... pre vatican 2, lay persons were not given
> both forms of communion, post vatican 2, both forms of communion are
> offered to everyone, clergy and laity both.
> Elizabeta of Rundel
>> I haven't read the book, nor am I a Catholic, but I was under the
>> impression that Catholic laity are not given the wine during
> What was the reasoning for this prior to Vatican 2? Did this go back
> to medieval times? What was the reasoning on making a change in/after
> Vatican 2?
Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 17:06:57 -0400
From: ranvaig at columbus.rr.com
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Bread and wine in the Catholic church
To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org>
I am not Catholic myself, but here is how I understand it. This is a
very medieval issue, and is something that most of our medieval
personas would but have known. Theology is such a touchy thing,
please, I don't mean to offend anyone.
The doctrine of transubstantiation means that the bread and wine
become the actual body and blood of Christ and not just food and
needed to be treated appropriately.
If you ate the bread, of course there was also blood in the body, and
that you didnt need to actually drink the cup, which was easier to spill.
Ranvaig (well.. it IS food related)
excerpted from http://users.ev1.net/~damonm/catholic-chronicles/
The teaching of transubstantiation does not date back to the Last
Supper as most Catholics suppose. It was a controversial topic for
many centuries... The idea of a physical presence was vaguely held by
some, such as Ambrose, but it was not until 831 A.D. that Paschasius
Radbertus, a Benedictine Monk, published a treatise openly advocating
the doctrine. It was not made a dogma, until 1215 A.D.
The historian Tertullian tells us that when this doctrine first began
to be taught in the Middle Ages, that the priests took great care
that no crumb should fall lest the body of Jesus be hurt, or even
eaten by a mouse or a dog! There were quite serious discussions as to
what should be done if a person were to vomit after receiving the
sacrament. At the Council of Constance, it was argued that if a
communicant spilled some of the blood on his beard, both beard and
the man should be destroyed by burning!
By the end of the eleventh century, lest someone should spill God's
blood, some in the church began to hold back the cup from the people,
and finally in 1415, the Council of Constance officially denied the
cup to laymen. Although today, by decree of the Vatican, churches may
now offer the cup optionally to communicants.
From: Sandra Geil <alexsandraeryn at yahoo.com>
Date: January 26, 2008 10:29:38 PM CST
To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 143
----- Original Message ----
Since the ninth century isn't my time period I don't have a lot of research on it. I have been looking clothing and I have gotten the general impression that Byzantine was the "high" fashion style. I have recently made a Byzantine style coronet and a garment to go with it. Do you think I as a Scottish women would had worn such a thing for dress occasion. I really don't want to wear "good" Danish garb because that would be the Norse apron if I am not wrong? Scotland would of had contact with the Norse and I would have heard about the courts of Byzantine.
----- response -----
I am a bit sketchy on the exact timeline but, Father James -- the priest assigned to St Elias in Austin -- taught us that both halves of the church - the eastern and the Roman were very active in early missionary efforts in Europe and the British Isles. At some point between their arrival and the split between the East and West a Southern King married a Northern Princess. He followed the Roman calendar and fashion. She followed the Eastern ways. It was a year like this one in which the observance of Easter and Pascha were far removed that the question of the form of Christianity in the Isles would be settled. As the king wanted his wife to feast with him -- she was still in the midst of the Lenten Fast -- he decreed his land and people would follow Rome. After this point the majority of the people of the Isles followed the Roman Patriarch (Pope) though there were people who held to Eastern ways in the areas removed from court for some time. By 1100 all of Europe was under the authority of Rome.
I am fairly certain that a Scot of this period would have been familiar with byzantine fashion through religious art at the very least. The Byzantine style is so pervasive in writing icons that even the recently recognized passion bearers of the Romanov family are shown wearing Byzantine garments in their icon.
From: SoldierGrrrl <soldier.grrrl at gmail.com>
Date: January 27, 2008 9:59:53 AM CST
To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 143
Pardon me, but I should introduce myself. My lady wife suggested that
I should speak to this topic in a bit more detail than she can.
Church history and the spread of Orthodox Christianity, as well as the
later Great Schism, are particular interests of mine, both as an
amateur historian, and an Orthodox Christian.
Ioannes Dalassenos, mka John M. Atkinson
> I am a bit sketchy on the exact timeline but, Father James -- the
> priest assigned to St Elias in Austin -- taught us that both halves
> of the > church - the eastern and the Roman were very active in
> early missionary efforts in Europe and the British Isles. At some
> point between
I don't mean to question Fr. James, but 'early missionary efforts' in
Europe were indeed the purview of Constantinople. If one is speaking
of Slavs or the Rus, or the Bulgars. However, Britain was essentially
completely Christian by the 5th Century AD, or shortly thereafter.
Before the withdrawal of Roman Soldiers in approx 406 AD (exact date
disputed) it would be ridiculous to speak of Eastern vs. Western
Christianity. After that withdrawal, the primary references to
contact with the Church are to bishops of Gaul for at least the next
century or two. After that, travel and communications had been
restored enough to bring Britain into the larger community of the West
through contacts with Rome.
> their arrival and the split between the East and West a Southern King
> married a Northern Princess. He followed the Roman calendar and
> fashion. She followed the Eastern ways. It was a year like this one
> in which the observance of Easter and Pascha were far removed that
> the question of the form of Christianity in the Isles would be
> settled. As the king wanted his wife to feast with him -- she was still in the > midst of the Lenten Fast -- he decreed his land and people would follow Rome. > After this point the majority of the people of the Isles
> followed the Roman Patriarch (Pope) though there were people who held to
> Eastern ways in the areas removed from court for some time.
Not true, however. That sounds like a slightly mythologized version
of the Synod of Whitby. Held in 664 in the reign of the Northumbrian
king Oswiu at the monastary of Streanoeshalch (later the Abbey of
Whitby, hence the name). Our primary source is the history of the
Venerable Bede, a monk who knew personally at least one significant
player in the Synod.
The calculation tables for Easter that were in use in England were
called Ionan, after the monastary of Iona. There were held to be in
error by Rome, who preferred the tables compiled by Dionysius Exiguus.
Synods in Gaul and Ireland had already been held and resolved in
favor of the Roman tables.
While it is true that Oswiu was the son of a King converted by Ionan
monks and his queen, Eanflaed (daughter of the King of Kent) was using
the Roman tables, this was not an issue for years. It was not until
St. Aidan had reposed and his successors were challenged by Irish
monks trained in the Roman tradition that it became an issue.
To portray the Ionan monks as being Orthodox (as we think of Orthodoxy
today) and the Irish as Roman Catholics (as we think of Roman
Catholics today) and this synod as a conflict between the two modern
groups is incorrect.
"Celtic Christianity" as represented by the Ionan monks has been
mythologized to a great deal, first by Protestant "Reformers" and now
today by Anglo converts to Orthodoxy as being something in line with
their own beliefs. This is not supportable. For one thing, the
controversies that separate the Orthodox and Catholic today were
something unknown in 7th Century Northumbria.
There is a supposition of division, of schism, and lack of communion,
that would have been unthinkable to an Ionan monk. It would not have
occurred to him that his method of calculating Easter or his style of
tonsure would or could constitute a separation of communion with the
successors of St. Peter in Rome. To him, they were a local custom
which he observed in the tradition of St. Columba who founded the
monastary at Iona.
> By 1100 all of Europe was under the authority of Rome.
Western Europe, with the breakpoint being the former Roman province of
Illyria, and Southern Italy was under Constantinople as well. Indeed,
to this day there are Eastern Rite Catholics in southern Italy.
> I am fairly certain that a Scot of this period would have been
> familiar with byzantine fashion through religious art at the very
> least. The Byzantine style is so pervasive in writing icons that
> even the recently recognized passion bearers of the Romanov family
> are shown wearing Byzantine garments in their icon.
Nonsense. Not to put too fine a point on it, Byzantine icons would
not have made it to the hinterlands. Even had they, they would have
been unique curiosities, not templates for fashion. Further,
iconography has a very stylized form of formal court dress, not actual
working fashion. It's one of the reasons finding out what the
"everyday" Byzantine wore is problematic. Like much Western art, the
people portrayed are either very important or highly stylized,
sometimes both, and also, frequently wearing vestments. Icons of the
Apostles are probably not going to be terribly useful for ascertaining
current Byzantine fashions, since they're wearing...well...robes/.
Also, any icons that might have been brought back from the East by a
Western pilgrim, probably would have been an icon of a familiar saint,
such as St. John, St. George, or the Theotokos. As these would have
been "old" saints, their icons would have been almost useless for
determining what current Byzantine fashion was. Within the empire,
court fashion was deliberately antiquated and highly regimented.
The icons of the Tsar-Martyr and his Holy Family are written in the
Byzantine style because they are Saints of the Orthodox Church.
Catholic saints are not depicted thus, and the Latins don't recognize
> al Aeryn
Also, be aware that those folx who lived further away from the centers
of "civilization" actually tended to incorporate more of the local
ethnic dress in their clothing. As 11th c. Capdocian, our persona
have a lot more leeway in what we would wear as opposed to someone
living in Constantinople.
And perhaps all of *Western* Europe was under the sway of Rome, but
Eastern Europe was still Orthodox. :-D
If we have offended you with our words, we would ask forgiveness.