Skip to main content

Should Protestants Celebrate St. Patrick’s Day?

 


The titular figure of St. Patrick is mired in legend. There are two writings of his in Latin, The Confessio (Confession) and the Eposato (Epistle). The Roman Catholic Church claims Patrick as a canonized saint, which includes some necromantic aspects of seeking him as a mediator, to pray for Catholics which is a violation of Scripture, for we have One Mediator, “For, There is one God and one Mediator who can reconcile God and humanity—the man Christ Jesus,” (2 Timothy 2:5), we have need of One Intercessor, “Therefore he is able, once and forever, to save those who come to God through Him (Jesus). He lives forever to intercede with God on their behalf,” (Hebrews 7:25), and we worship One Lord, “It is written, worship The Lord God and serve Him only.” (Luke 4:8). The problem is some Celtic Christians claim that Patrick taught the Irish a Christianity more simple and without popery, leading to beliefs that he can be champion of the faith of the early church and thus safe for Protestants. There is a tale that Patrick taught his Irish disciples a Christianity more akin to Evangelicalism and that Roman Catholics came, enslaved, and killed them, which is why he wrote a rebuke and asked for the bishop’s help on this matter in his Epistle, while defending His post as Overseer in Ireland. 


Patrick like St. Valentinus, St. Nicholas (Santa Claus) and Augustine of Hippo are claimed by both Catholics and Protestants. Though it is Roman Catholics that venerate him in their pagan way of demi-god intercessions, while Protestants see him as an inspiration for missionary work. This makes untangling the Celtic knots of how to approach this figure in church history complicated. Both sides lay claim to him, Protestants urging he maintained the faith of the apostles that survived in some form despite Imperial Christianity, while Catholics emphatically say he is a bishop and saint of their mother church in Rome. 


Things become infinitely more complicated when you consider the bad blood between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, and the literal bloodshed between. When people think of wearing green for Catholic, and we Protestants can wear orange, you might think it just a cleaver color identifier, but the darkness in Ireland over Catholics and Protestants killing each other in theo-xenophobia, that is religious ethnic hatred makes wearing either color grim. Many may argue that now the green is simply about clover leaves and leprechauns, and not Catholicism, and that Orange is not about The Protestant William of Orange who conquered Ireland in The Revolution against King James II, but is now just a Protestant color or part of the Irish flag. But symbols hold meaning, and their origins like the legends of Patrick do not simply vanish because of modern sensibilities. Santa Claus may be a far cry from the true St. Nicholas, but the Turkish Bishop is not entirely overshadowed by the Nordic-Germanic Santa. In the same way Patrick and his legacy is still with us, despite the secularization of the holiday, its still called St. Patrick’s Day, just as Christmas still has Christ in the name, and we all use the year 2024 which is Anno Domni, the Year of Our Lord, 2024 years since Christ Jesus our Lord was born in 1 A.D. Our secular world is still using a calendar that is tied to remembrance of Jesus’ Incarnation.  


Should we Protestants celebrate St. Patrick’s Day whither secular, or in a Irish Protestant way? I would say that is matter of your conscience before Christ. What I will say is since the stories surrounding his life are as dizzying as Celtic knots (which are used in witchcraft by the way) and it is unclear what is true or not about him, I would refrain from the appearance of venerating a missionary saint who it is unclear if he was devout Catholic or paragon of a undefiled biblical faith.  I recommend instead fix your eyes on Christ, “Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” (Hebrews 12:2). With Easter falling in the month of March we can instead direct our attention to the gospels rather than fables. Amen. 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Israel’s Conquest of Canaan: The Nephilim and Giants

  Christianity Today asserts that the conquest of Canaan can be a “stumbling block” for believers. This probably is because of a foolish idea of comparing it to a modern conquest happening in our world. The truth is that God had Israel conquer Canaan because it was ruled by evil giants, “We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.” (Numbers 13:33). These are Anakim or Nephilim, the children of angels and human women, “When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God (angels) saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. The...
Post a Comment
Read more

Dispensationalism

John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) was a man who did two things, he took 70th week of the Book of Daniel and stretched out to the End Times, and he was the father of  Dispensationalism , a belief system that God dispenses different peoples with separate blessings and covenants. According to Darb'ys doctrine of Dispensationalism, God dispenses different covenants. There are total of seven dispensations that divide the history of man: I. Dispensation of Innocence (prior to the Fall, "Do not east of the Fruit of Good and Eve, Eden), II. Dispensation of Conscience ( You must assuage guilt and sin with blood sacrifices.) III. Dispensation of Human Government (Multiply and Subdue the world, example the Tower of Babel Gen 11:1-9, and Genesis 1:28). IV. Dispensation of the Promise (Dwell in Canaan, Jerusalem) V. Dispensation of the Law ("Obey the Law of Moses and the Prophets"). VI. Dispensation of Grace (The Church, Jesus Christ has come...
Post a Comment
Read more

Jesus’ Name in Aramaic

There has been a trend to render Jesus’ name Hebrew, יֵשׁוּעַ , Yeshua. The problem is neither Christ nor his apostles, nor the Jews in 30-33 A.D. spoke Hebrew, they spoke Aramaic. A ramaic is the oldest language on earth and was the language Jesus spoke. In fact, the oldest Old Testament is the Septuagint a Greco translation around 132 B.C.E. (165 Years Before Christ)that was translated from Aramaic. The Masoretic Text, The Hebrew Old Testament most Bibles use, dates from 7th to 10th Century A.D. (Medieval Times).  This translation does not cross reference with the words of Christ in the New Testament which are Aramaic and Koine Greek.  If the Aramaic was what Jesus spoke, then by what name would have been called? Jesus’ name in Aramaic is Isho or Eesho, spelled ܝܫܘܥ . That is the name of our Lord in Aramaic! He would have heard his name in this dialect, “Hail Isho or Eesho!” as well as the Greek, Ἰ ησο ῦ ς , Iesous.  Aramaic is disappearing, only a few peop...
Post a Comment
Read more