Jump to content

Talk:Saint Patrick

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleSaint Patrick was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 14, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
September 15, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
September 20, 2007Good article nomineeListed
January 12, 2010Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

st patrick parent[edit]

no dad 174.78.88.18 (talk) 16:28, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lutheran saint?[edit]

The text asserts that Patric is "venerated as a saint in the ... Lutheran church...". Lutheran churches do not recognize "saints" or venerate them, even though Lutheran church buildings may be named after disciples, evangelists or archangels venerated by Catholics as "saints". Jarmo K. (talk) 14:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quality of Content[edit]

This is a truly dreadful article, mostly obsessed with Catholic trivia about shamrocks, bells, and visions. Patrick was actually a most important person in establishing and propagating literacy - a fundamental tool for propagating religious philosophy. Catholicism, for example. By ignoring the literacy part of Patrick's existence, this article becomes an astonishing and execrable waste of time! Is nobody here aware of this other side of Patrick's life, not to mention being able to include some relevant history? Henrilebec (talk) 01:32, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't really know any of this. You seem to want to replace one style of hagiographical myth-making with another. Johnbod (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm again astonished that a would-be Patrick scholar would be so completely in the dark about Patrick's work as to suggest that it's simply more "hagiographical myth-making"! Here is just one example of an academic analysis of Patrick's substantial, even monumental, works from 807 A.D.: https://www.confessio.ie/manuscripts/dublin#1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henrilebec (talkcontribs) 00:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm well aware of the Confessio, but I don't think Patrick actually mentions teaching reading, let alone writing, anywhere in it, though he may well have done some of that. Johnbod (talk) 02:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wholehearedly concur. There is a load of deliberate obfuscation here. What is the point of quoting an idiot from 130 years ago who was so arrogant as to assert that Patrick could not spell at all. You quote him as referring to "Bonaven Taburnia" when it is, of course, Bannavem Taburniae. Yes... this does refer to the Roman Fort Banna on Hadrian's Wall (now usually called Birdoswald).
The Bannaventa near Coventry is matched by another, now Banwen, in Wales and means "pig market". On the other hand Bannavem Taburniae means "The Boars' Inns" because when the legionaries left it became a hunting lodge complex. Freuchie (talk) 15:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Myth?[edit]

So, is St. Patrick a myth? 50.45.18.139 (talk) 14:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Err..... no, but the Catholic Church did so mess with eg his dates (for their own political reasons) as to make their story as worthless as a myth. There was a real person born c420 at Gretna who died in 493. Freuchie (talk) 15:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]