SC - Re: Pagan dieties vs. Christain Saints/ religious anthropology

[Kay Loidolt]

Johann here: I just thought I might share this line of thinking with the 
rest of you. I don't mean to encourage flames, but rather some serious 
thought provoking research of these two topics; religious 
anthropology(how humans shape and are shaped by their religion) and 
Hagiagraphy(how humans describe and remember their heroes, esp. 
christians though not soley)
  If there is enough interest I would like to set up a little discussion
list on these subjects and medieval philosophy and how we as medievalist 
might better understand the influence on our period.

Kay Loidolt wrote:
> 
> Johann von Metten writes:
>  First, I apologize for taking this off topic and if anyone wants to
> continue a 'NON-Flaming' discussion of various religious anthropological
> topics, please respond privately.
> 
>   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.