Excursus on William Tell and Catholic Saints

Second Round essays: Henke Can't Read · Henke Can't Argue Philosophy Very Well Either · Henke Still Can't Read - Or Hasn't Done so To Lewis · To Reaffirm "Earliest Known Audience" · The Philosophy of History of Henke : Given without References, Refuted without References · He Applies It · (Excursus on William Tell and Catholic Saints) · Continuing on Section 5 · We're Into Section 6!

Kevin R. Henke has now more than once linked to these two links, by Robert Wernick for one, and by Larry Jimenez, factchecked by Jamie Frater, for the other. My turn to make mincemeat of them:

Smithsonian : In Search of William Tell
Robert Wernick | August 2004
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/in-search-of-william-tell-2198511/

Problem 1:

There is just one small problem: many historians doubt that Tell ever made those two famous arrow shots in 1307, and many are convinced that no such person as William Tell ever existed.

No problem, what I expect of such people. Problem 2? Yes:

For one thing, his story wasn’t set down fully until 1569- 70, some 250 years after the events it describes, by historian Aegidius Tschudi

Would have been a problem in a better documented area of Europe, like Paris or London. Problem 3:

In 1758, nearly two centuries after Tschudi’s death, up turned a forgotten copy of the original Oath of Rütli made by the representatives of the three forest cantons, none of whom was named Tell. It was dated “the beginning of August 1291,” so the whole episode had to be moved back 16 years (only Uri remains stubbornly faithful to the old date of 1307).

Solution, William Tell only represented Uri. And therefore only later signed the Rüetli Ääid - case closed, historic.

Listverse : 10 Beloved Saints The Church Just Made Up
by Larry Jimenez | MAY 17, 2014
fact checked by Jamie Frater
https://listverse.com/2014/05/17/10-beloved-saints-with-fictitious-biographies/

10) St. Veronica - In fact, Greeks call here Berenike, and Veronica is a nickname with reference to vera icon, the cloth she obtained by wiping Our Lord's face. And it is in Oviedo, and agrees in facial features and blood group (I think) with the Shroud of Turin (there is yet another not manmade icon, sent to king Abgar of Edessa).

There is no specific reason to doubt her existence except that the Latin version of her name is an anagram, and that she is not in the Bible, neither of which is a reason. There are general reasons presented above, which do not hold ground.

9) St. Euphrosyne was the daughter of Paphnutius, a wealthy citizen of Alexandria. ... Her perfect ascetic life impressed the abbot, and when Paphnutius came to him seeking comfort in his sorrow, the abbot directed him to the care of Smargadus. Paphnutius unknowingly became his daughter’s disciple.Euphrosyne was soon known for her holiness and wisdom. On her deathbed, in A.D. 470, she finally revealed to her father her true identity. Paphnutius thereafter became a monk himself and lived in his daughter’s cell for the remaining 10 years of his life.

Any real problem?

So goes the story of St. Euphrosyne, but she represents a whole class of cross-dressing female saints.

Is St. Joan of Arc a retold story of this group too?

Georges Bernanos took pride in descending from her brother.

It seems that medieval folk were fascinated by women successfully impersonating men to elevate their status in the sight of God. Modern scholarship dismisses Euphrosyne’s story as pious fiction and even concludes that St. Euphrosyne never existed.

OK ... modern scholarship is the alleged reason for rejecting her (and her father St. Paphnutius') existence. Have you tried tea leaves?

8) St. Catherine of Alexandria. ... Donald Attwater, in his updated version of Lives of the Saints, calls the above legend “the most preposterous of its kind,” as there is “no positive evidence that she ever existed outside the mind of some Greek writer who first composed what he intended to be simply an edifying romance.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, though maintaining belief in Catherine’s historical existence, admits that stories about her “are to be rejected as inventions, pure and simple.”The 18th-century Benedictine monk Dom Deforis declared the same traditions as false, and since that time, devotion to the virgin-martyr of Alexandria lost all its former popularity. Catherine was removed from the Church’s liturgical calendar in 1969—but she was restored by Pope John Paul II in 2002.

OK, Donald Attwater, Dom Deforis and Catholic Encyclopedia are reasons to disbelieve what is told of her? With two of the three on top of that denying her existence?

Not good enough for me, no. And especially not as this "criticism" was cause for an impious removal in 1969!

7) St. Margaret Of Antioch ...
5) St. Barbara ...
4) St. Alexius Of Rome ...

All seem obsessed with, a) is not recorded in "history" as if "history" were one book or book collection like the Bible, b) earliest now extant version is from some centuries later (like 700 or later).

That is not an argument. Recorded "in history" means recorded in texts of the past. The question is, which texts of the past are considered historic, and here the argument is, a text from 400 years later than the events is not historic, even if it is not contradicting any contemporaneous text. I disagree with that methodology.

3) St. Eustace (or Eustachius) ... However, the Martyrologium Romanum has dubbed him “completely fabulous,” referring to his story’s authenticity, not his style of dress.

Checking, september 20th ...

Romae passio sanctorum Martyrum Eustachii et Theopistis uxoris, cum duobus filiis Agapito et Theopisto, qui, sub Hadriano Imperatore, damnati ad bestias, sed Dei ope ab iis nullatenus laesi, tandem, in bovem aeneum candentem inclusi, martyrium consummarunt.

In Rome, passion of the holy martyrs Eustachius and his wife Theopistis (or Godfaith), with their two sons Agapitus and Theopistus (also Godfaith, but in masculine version), who, under Emperor Hadrian, condemned to (be eaten by) the beasts, but by God's assistance not the least hurt by them, at last, shut into a brass bull glowing hot, fulfilled their martyrdom.

It says nothing of "completely fabulous" in the Roman Martyrology that I accept, the reference is probably to some production of 1969 by people too cowed down by modern scholarship (why don't they try tea leaves?).

2) St. George ... Pope Gelasius admitted that George is one of those saints “whose actions are known only to God.” He is so shrouded in legend that some people believe he never existed at all or is just a Christianized version of an older, pagan myth.

In fact, the version with the dragon is not given in the Roman martyrology, and believing as I do that dinosaurs were on the Ark, both St. George killing the dragon and Perseus killing another one and Beowulf and Siegfried killing two more such seems legitimate to me. But it is not essential to the story.

23 Aprilis Natalis sancti Georgii Martyris, cujus illustre martyrium inter Martyrum coronas Ecclesia Dei veneratur.

Birthday (meaning heavenly birthday, death to the body, soul going directly to heaven same day and not passing through unknown time in purgatory) of holy martyr George, whose illustrious martyrdom the Church of God venerates among the Crowns of martyrs.

Pope Gelasius said his deeds were known only to God, not that his sufferings were so. He also lived near 200 years after St. George.

So, Catholics venerate him, so do Orthodox who broke off in 1053 - George the Trophy-bearer, so do Copts who broke off against Chalcedon, St. George the Prince of Martyrs (Parmoute 23rd) is also known as St. George of Cappadocia, a city in modern-day Turkey. Of all the saints named George, he is the most known. So do presumably Armenians : The Armenian Apostolic Church of St. George and they also broke off against Chalrcedon, and so do Nestorians, who broke off already against Ephesus:

There is but one church at Asheetha, which is dedicated to Mar Gheorghees (S. George), a favourite saint among the Nestorians.

Wikisource, The Nestorians and their Rituals,
Volume 1 by George Percy Badger, Chapter 15
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Nestorians_and_their_Rituals/Volume_1/Chapter_15

No reason at all to not consider him historic. Btw, The Council of Chalcedon .... convened in the city of Chalcedon, Bithynia (modern day Kadikoy, Turkey) from 8 October to 1 November 451 AD. And the Council of Ephesus was a council of Christian bishops convened in Ephesus (near present-day Selçuk in Turkey) in AD 431. Since he died in 303, this means he was honoured by all Christians within 128 years. A good reason to believe him historic.

1) St. Christopher

I thought he was coming, like one of the crew "put out of job" as intercessors, if the new things in 1969 were valid, which they weren't.

The reasons given are, a) his story is a spiritual parable, b) an anonymous Christian martyr got it attached. Well, if that is so, this "anonymous" Christian martyr (but "delante de Dios, nunca serás heróe anónimo") is interceding for the people invoking St. Christopher. But no real reason is given to believe it did not happen.

All of above fall within what I consider as history, not so:

6) St. Philomena ... The pious fiction was inspired by the discovery in 1802 of a tomb in the Catacomb of Priscilla, mistakenly identified as belonging to an early Christian martyr. The name “Filumena” was inscribed on the earthenware slabs closing the grave, so the alleged martyr was assumed to be a virgin called “Philomena.”The relics were transferred to the church in Mungano, and a nun named Maria Luisa di Gesu began receiving revelations about the life and martyrdom of Philomena, allegedly from Philomena herself.

So, no, it is not history, it is archaeology and prophecy stepping in. Did the prophecy get approval of the Church? Yes:

The revelations received the approval of the Holy Office (today’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), and the entire story, as it came to Mother Maria, was written in an official account by Fr. Di Lucia.

So, we should not hesitate to invoke St. Philomena, even if what we know of her is prophecy rather than history. Unlike Mother Maria, Joseph Smith had no such approval, you see.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Ascension of Our Lord
26.V.2022