E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSLONDON -- St. Patrick, patron saint of Ireland, may well have been a tax collector for the Romans who fled to Ireland where he could have traded slaves to pay his way, according to new research by a University of Cambridge academic published on Saturday.
The generally accepted account of the saint's life, albeit based on scant evidence, says Patrick was abducted from western Britain as a teenager and forced into slavery in Ireland for six years during which time he developed a strong Christian faith.
Afterwards, the account continues, he escaped his captors and went back to Britain before eventually returning to Ireland as a missionary.
But Roy Flechner, from the Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic at Cambridge, believes there are reasonable grounds to question the popular version which is based partly on Patrick's own words.
"The problem with this account is that he was telling this story in response to accusations leveled against him that he fled to Ireland for financial gain," Flechner told Reuters in a telephone interview.
"It's an inference that has been made long before in conventional scholarship."
10 best St. Patrick's Day parades for families
According to the study, published on Saturday to coincide with St. Patrick's Day, the saint may have wanted to leave Britain in the early 400s to avoid the "onerous" duties of a "Decurion", or Roman official responsible for collecting taxes.
Patrick's father was a Decurion and, when he decided to rid himself of the post by becoming a cleric, his responsibilities would have fallen to his son.
Slaves were his 'liquid assets'
At a time when Roman government in Britain was in decline, collecting and underwriting taxes would have been an unwelcome task, enough to prompt Patrick to emigrate, Flechner said.
"It is likely that at least for a while he (Patrick) held an imperial office. One way or another, I think this would have been the catalyst for him leaving for Ireland."
The academic also questioned Patrick's own account of escaping slavery in Ireland.
"Once you escaped from slavery you lacked any legal status and anyone could imprison you and kill you, and this conflicts with what he said -- that he broke loose, crossed Ireland and then the Irish Sea to get back to Britain," he explained.
"He might not even have been acknowledged as a free man in his native Britain and could have been enslaved again there."
If Patrick had left Britain for Ireland of his own free will, the best way to take his wealth with him would be in the form of slaves, Flechner argued.
Patrick himself said his family owned slaves, which was common for aristocratic families in this period.
"Your property would have been hereditary and in the form of land, but if you had wanted to transport the value of the property, it is more likely you would have traded a more 'liquid asset', in this case slaves.
"In a slightly later period where we do have more sources, slaves had become a very important social institution and quite ubiquitous in Ireland."
Flechner conceded that it was difficult to be sure of any theory about a period of British history covered by so little reliable material.
But he added that his study had the advantage of being "free from the more reverential accounts of St. Patrick that have been handed down in legend through the generations.
"In this case we are seeing Patrick through the eyes of Roman law which offers a new perspective.
"None of this is to say that Patrick was not a bishop or that he did not engage in missionary activity, but his primary motives for moving to Ireland were most likely to escape the poisoned chalice of his inherited position in Roman Britain."
Reuters contributed to this report.
More from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- US soldier suspected in Afghanistan massacre identified
- Well, he knows horses: Stable lad wins $1.5 million racing bet
- Report: Bin Laden told followers to kill Obama, Petraeus
- Could Anglican church have first black spiritual leader?
- From university campus to torture chamber: A Syrian's story
Follow us on Twitter: @msnbc_world
Leave a Comment:
I wish MSNBC would take the "older" tabs off of these pages. It makes it so much harder to read the text.
Who cares? MSNBC is worthless as a media concern and that is not important either!
rick-503775 "Who cares? MSNBC is worthless as a media concern and that is not important either!"
It's good for comic relief, and to see what 'talking points' they get from the Obama White House.
As for the story, it's just more speculation from secular sources about religious matters, but 'White Slavery' has been carried out throughout history, including in the early Americas as 'Indentured Servitude', so it certainly wasn't restricted to other ethnic groups.
MSN loves to spin stories that make whitey look good. Excellent representation of St. Patrick's day MSN!
I sure hope he didn't sell slaves, that would make him responsible for so many sponging off America now.
I don't like the tabs either. You have to go to the side bar to scroll down. Why can't they just have the article?
Zack,
This is Mindless Sophomoric News. If they removed the tabs, it would merely change the news from obscured to obscure.
MSNBC worthless? And yet so many who claim it to be the case contribute their obviously valuable comments. HA!
This debunked nonsense appears periodically probably attempting to influence those with limited intellect that haven't heard it previously. It seems this postulated theory that makes great assumptions will be accepted by any that choose to denigrate Christianity. It a theory, however vague and unproven, debases the character of any Christian or white person, it must be true.
Dont you mean look bad? Why else would they accuse St. Patrick of being a slave trader on his holiday..
Compared to Fox News, yes. It gets its butt pwned by Fox just like DNCNN does.
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/03/16/cable-news-ratings-for-thursday-march-15-2012/124723/
And regarding this "news" it's just yet another example of the self white-hate/guilt liberal mentality attempting to indoctrinate the dumb-masses with feeble minds and low intellect. After all, that's where liberalism gets its support base from.
Why would they accuse St Patrick of being a slave trader? Because they want to attack anything that people enjoy. (If they can get the anonymous "They Said" machine going they can undermine a basically "white" celebration.
This is just too depressing, i'm going to crack open a bottle of good Stout, or maybe bitters, hmmmmmm.............
I would just like to say that St. Patrick may have been a tax collector for the Romans who enslaved the Irish just as the British did at certain points in time...as soon as the word "slave"is mentioned, it is always assumed that Africans held by slavery is the topic of discussion...many people were enslaved and that includes many "white" people...the Irish, the Welsh, the French and anyone who lived on coastal areas were subject to becoming slaves...please see this article:
I don't think the intent of the article was to undermine a "white" celebration, just to share maybe some history about St. Patrick. King James II, Charles I, and Oliver Cromwell believed in slavery of their neighbors...Irish prisoners were sent to the USA in the 1600's and sold as slaves by the king.
Kornfed - Most intelligent know that Black Africans are the inventors of the "Slave Trade". It was the African Rulers that sold Black Africans to the Europeans, it wasn't the other way around. To this very day Black African Leaders continue to sell other Blacks into Slavery. So Kornfed, why don't you go to Africa and see how long you continue to breath air when you complain about Slavery. You blame "Whitey" only because you don't want to face the fact that Black were then and continue to be sold into slavery everyday. There are other groups that were enslaved, the Irish, Italians, Ethopians, Arabs and not just Blacks. The difference being that the other ethnic rose above their captors and made their own way whereas, Blacks continue to live in the past and blame everyone else (just like O'Bama does) for their failures.
What are the chances we see an article on a Muslim holiday speaking to Muhammad being a known pedophile? Yeah, none to zero chance of that story EVER appearing....much less on a Muslim holiday.
Anyone can see that this is another (successful) attempt by MSN to get people to click on an article by enticing them with a "juicy scoop" like headline. And judging by all the comments it seems to work.
Jhawk is right on target.
dang it ...don't pinch me for not wearing green...it's saint paddy's day...buzz kill story... MSNBC...
I think it was kind of MSNBC to remind us all that they are above all, a POS news venue. Threw out all the known Christian witness of his life to speculate about the dirty deeds of the time that might have been part of his life. Cambridge U. loses credibility as well.
Your talking about the morals of a different age. What was considered proper then is not the same as what is considered proper now. Don't judge the morals of 1000 yrs ago with the morals of 2012.
St pats big crime was bringing christianity to people.
I see a major - yet hardly mentioned - thread running among the above discussion(s). It is a commission of what is known as Dillingham's fallacy: judging past behavior by present-day (or contemporary) standards. In this case, it is whether St.Patrick owned/trafficed (spelling?) in slaves. In his day, it was normal, and appropriate, to do so. As others said, slaves were a more portable and liquid form of wealth than land. Throughout history people, usually conquerers, held slaves, usually the conquered. Typically, the slaves could buy their own freedom, but not always. Throughout recorded history, slavery has been practiced. As some said above, even today. Only today, it is considered evil. Another example of Dillinigham's fallacy can be found in "correct society's" condemnation of Christopher Columbus during 1992. People were condemning him for the horrors, as they saw it, of the Conquest of the Americas. He didn't do it; he was only looking for a short cut to China. And the Conquistadores were only doing what was condsidered normal for their profession during that time. The point of this discussion is "stop judging past behavior by today's standards! You can get into trouble doing so."
Happy Saint Paddy's Day...now clog...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs2j8f7H2WY&feature=related
I am happy to hear that I am not the only one who dislikes the older/newer tabs. Thought maybe I was just being crabby?
MNSNBC, TAKE THEM AWAY, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dude, Maria you are educated however your intellect is quite minimal. This story is definately meant for your kind, and I see half of Americans as your kind. Wise up Maria1168760. Everyone should know by now that the media gets christmas goose bumps when an anti american theory or fact is put forward. Then they want to advertise it to all their low intelect but liberaly educated audience.
the slaves they are talking about in this article AREN'T African slaves folks! they were other white European and Middle-Eastern people, taken in conquest by the Roman armies or traded from their white European neighbors for 'civilized' Roman goods like glass, fancy textiles, wines etc. the 'African' slaves that may have been circulated at that time were almost exclusively people from North Africa- Egyptians, Moroccans, etc (read: not black Africans). it was very, very rare during the Roman period to see Africans from south of the Sahara- a slave from those regions would have been an incredibly expensive and exotic possession and highly valued (read: well-treated/treasured).
slavery was NOT invented when white Europeans started trading in black Africans during the 1400's!! it has existed throughout human history, and tended to occur during any periods of conflict/conquest/expansion between tribes or regions. it was practiced by every ethnicity and on every continent. the native North and South Americans practiced slavery; the ancient Chinese used slave labor to build the Great Wall; there are multiple mentions of slavery throughout the Bible- slavery in which the Jews were alternately the slaves and the masters. Alexander the Great used slaves to schlep his armies' gear across Asia; the Pharoahs used slaves to build the Pyramids. and even today there is still a thriving business in sexual slavery. and almost NONE of the aforementioned slaving involved black people of African ethnicity!
discussing whether St. Patrick traded slaves or not has ZERO to do with the African slave trade. it also has zero to do with 'bashing Christianity' or making 'a Christian saint look bad. it is just filling in context and background to the life of a real person. teach yourself some history people- you can do it from the comfort of that computer chair your butt is planted in at the moment, so it's not even that difficult!
Allie22 This story is definately made for educated yet intelectually stinted androids like you. This is absolutely christian bashing. And you say to teach ourselves history yet to you history is obloviated liberally spun theories of history. Wise up.
They probably make you click to demonstrate active involvement, and thus be able to charge the advertisers more.
Mark, you haven't yet enlightened us as to what precisely about the info in the article involves 'Christian-bashing'. I read nothing in that article that said anything about the religion of Patrick. it gave information about his family background and filled in some detail about the political climate during Patrick's lifetime. it gave several possibilities as to why Patrick was in Ireland. it didn't question his faith, it didn't question the veracity of miracles attributed to him or deny in any way his extensive missionary activity. you do understand that Patrick was a real live human, yes? he was not of divine origin- any more than Paul or the Twelve Apostles. Paul was known to be a Roman tax collector- if we write in an article that Paul was an historical person of Roman citizenship who worked as an Imperial tax collector prior to his conversion to Christianity, are we 'bashing the Christian faith'? I say-no, we are not. if you think so, it is possibly because you are suffering some kind of hysterical denial of reality. maybe you should see a doctor about that.
I was going to try really hard to not ask you to explain what 'obloviated' means, since I am so 'intelectually (sic) stinted'. but I can't stand it- I have to know. what does it mean? my ignorant google can't seem to tell me
msnbc and the msn and anti americans and obama butt lovers all hate the Catholic church and other churches because they stand against abortion people so they are attacking the Catholic church left and right , Do not let these evil people fool you that is what this is all about murdering innocent babies they want the ability to murder at will and the church is standing with it moral compass against this. So it not St patrick or st paul or any Saint or the Pope or God or Jesus per say it what the church stands against. So understand it and know it completely and spread the word. Obama and his menions are evil and they hate God and his word and nothing can show me different. he and his evil wife want to be dictators of our fee country. We need to do want ever it takes to rid ourselves of these two legally meaning next election he out for ever and infact he should be exciled from our country
I get so tired of MSN and Yahoo digging up the past. The past that my family and ancestors had nothing to do with. My white family was made up of farmers poor as owl $hit and we did not own squat. Barely eeked out a living and fed themselves. It would be NICE if everyone would move FORWARD and TRY to live in love and peace.
Many of the comments beating up on MSNBC and the scholars are just knee jerk reaction to the word 'slave' meeting up with typical T'publican guilt at ......
1. how enslaved they are to their doctrine.
2. how tightly wowned up they are about their already questionable image
3. their wanting to believe that they would even have been rich enough to have owned slaves in the first place or at any time in history
4. trying to pretend that back then their ancestors were not slaves
5. trying to pretend that they themselves are not slaves now, and do not hear their masters' voice still ringing in their ears
6. wanting to believe that only black people or other ethnicities were slaves but never them
7. or trying to show their stupidity, ignorance and inability to learn or look at what was written in context of that period in history
8. or trying to believe everything in history is about them as if they were that relevant
9. looking for something or anything that they may use to spew forth their vile, ignorant spiel at others not like or as narrow minded as themselves
10. trying to downplay the research presented because it was done by an unbiased Cambridge scholar and not done by a black scholar in this country so
11. they will now be unable to do the usual revisionism that they usually do to the history books here
12. or call the scholar a racist who do not like white people and only want to put white people down. LOL
Get a grip people..... one could say that every Saint that was a human being had feet of clay at some point in their life. It was those times where these saints had feet of clay that helped them to work harder, to do better, to over come that weak or selfish person that they used to be and instead to be selfless, and it was through or due to this transformation into being a better person that elevated them to that level of selflessness that led to their sainthood imo.
Peace....can't we just get along... Happy St Paddy's day......
I was taught he was kiddnaped ad sold into slavery as a teen , was pagan, escaped , studied christianity came back and began to preach christianity and drove all the snakes (pagans) out of ireland even wrote a book about his life. I also read that he really missed the pagan orgies hmmm .
people in the old days lied ,told tale tails, exaggerated, what if it is true he sold slaves to get money to leave briton but told another story that infact he was kiddnapped and forced into slavery and into paganism . he was a man and with no news agencies or lack of educated people and no internet he could say and do whatever. sounds like good old st pat was just a manipulative con man . no wonder everyone gets drunk on his holiday LOL btw sounds like his dad was a class act too.
I though St. Patrick was known for inventing beer?
No?
Well, whoever invented beer should be made a saint!
It was the Leprechauns..
Denny,
I thought he is the one who is supposed to have driven all the snakes out of Ireland. At any rate, it doesn't seem to me this is the sort of news story that it is appropriate to publish on St. Patrick's day, whether it's true or not. It denigrates the saint.
NO!!! Beer was "invented" (a piss-poor word for what actually happened) about 10,000 years BEFORE St. Patrick was born!!!
(Not really yelling, just surprised someone could be so fact-challenged about so important a subject: BEER.)
St.Gambrinus Denny
Wrong, Denny. St. Patrick actually invented green food coloring.
He was responsible for the first, 'Trashing of the streets' in the spring, which kicked off the festival of drunken public crime extending through the summer months.
There was beer long before St. Patrick was a twinkle in his mother's eye.
It was monks (a religious order; not the TV detective) that invented beer presumably!
Actually it was the Egyptians that invented the first 'beer'. It was created as a cheap portable substance to feed slaves. The original beer was actually closer to what is now known as Mead, and was a fermented honey product. Beer grew in popularity during the Roman conquest of Europe, as water was not considered safe to drink.
Slavery has been around since the beginning of time and was not seen as an 'evil' thing until the last 150 years or so. Romans, Egyptians, Persians, all used slaves. Many were soldiers of a defeated army who would gain their freedom and citizen status after so many years servitude. Many people also sold themselves into a form slavery (indentured servitude) as a means of paying of their debts.
People need to put aside all the 'political' BS, because contrary to limited belief, not EVERYTHING has to do with politics or religion.
Leftcoast he was obviously joking. Don't take it so personally. Either way, they can't prove whether or not he had slaves and considering that many wealthy african people also owned slaves and sold them whether or not he owned slaves doesn't improve or degrade his reputation and it's a pointless study, if he owned slaves does someone win a lottery? I hope no one was being paid for this.
DaveH, it's all about money.
There was a great documentary on last year on how beer was responsible for civilization, very good program.
Slaves in Ireland weren't black, they were Irish, or, whoever the Romans had captured lately.
And, agriculture began when the nomads stopped to grow the ingredients for beer.
essie222:
Beer is NOT responsible for civilization; it is at times responsible for civilization being TOLERABLE.
O' top o' th' mornin' to ya ladsh an' lasshies. The comedy'sh flowin' an sho ish th beer. I've gaught me knife 'n me bar o' soap. But mary p,my dear I need to add......and the feelin' in hish daddy'sh thigh, although I learned it in the revershe. hiccuurrrppp.......I'm feelin' better now. And for me friend Rlquall....it'sh been makin' lasshies look better too, I think. hiccuuurrrrpppppp.
MSNBC,
Who wrote, edited and/or contributed to this article? It is unethical for a public news agency to post an article without identifying the author(s). Edward R. Murrow is rolling over in his grave. MSNBC is becoming very, very, very sleazy.
Becoming?? lol
MSNBC is the leader in sleaze.
Mindless Sophomoric News. (but I repeat myself)
Publishing an article about what a horrible person Saint Patrick was (cant defend himself )on Saint Patrick's day is pretty sleazy . But they did it just to get a large reaction which they achieved . Very much like something Jerry Springer or Steve Wilcos would do .
To the editor ----If this MSNBC gig doesn't work out for you ,you can always get a job at the National Enquirer
No offense to anbody but, I'm just glad to see an article not about gays, abortion or pedophile teachers for once.
"MSNBC is the leader in sleaze."
No, that would be the RNC.
I dont think, he is National Enquirer material. The National Enquirer actually break real stories every few yrs..
John-905243
Gort, Klatoo Berada Nictoe
Realist,
After the long day of St. Patrick's festivities, the earth does stand still.
denver bill 2
Actually after the long day of St. Patrick's festivities I would think the earth would spin a bit faster for all of the inebriated festivity partakers.
Realist,
We have no disagreement. You are obviously talking about partiers in their vertical and frenetic state. I am talking about the same partiers in their horizontal and comatose state. ;)
"It is unethical for a public news agency to post an article without identifying the author(s)." But that's SOP for MSNBC.
And who is putting this story out to discredit the Patron Saint to Ireland ????? An English University prof
of course !
As the Irish say.....let him speak, it has got to come out somewhere.
Nevada: Who's responsible for irresponsible journalism? President Ronald Reagan--for repealing the FCC "Fair Reporting" laws.
If you think that the FCC's inane "Fairness Doctrine" created fairness, then you must think that the Department of Education educates children, the Department of Energy generates energy, and the Department of Agriculture was responsible for the invention of food.
sure he did, he is catholic, the question is did he sell little boys
Like the Rabi's, Afgan's, Muslims, atheists, protestants and every other group on earth? What was covered up was a tragedy and still not corrected but not exclusive to Catholics. Read up a little more before posting your narrow minded thoughts for the world to see.
Thats what I thought
Satan does everything in his power to keep people away from receiving the Holy Eucharist. So, GAME ON!
The scholar raises "questions" and make "inferences" and states "most likely" conclusions about "motives" of a man from 1600 years ago. A legitimate question might be to ask about the motives of the scholar.
Or the motives of MSNBC, CNN and the usual liberal MSM hacks, for publicizing this sub-par research which is purely an exercise of Academic speculation.
I agree with you! Words such as "likely", "might", "probably" and "could" don't belong in any historical theory.
Also a "Decurion" wasn't necessarily a tax collector. It also designates a leader of ten men, namely legionaries.
I'm usually pretty left leaning but I agree with the assessment of MSNBC on this one.Pretty sleazy posting something like this on Saint Patrick's day.
Exactly....this story offers no evidence. The only problem is now there are many people who just read the headline or don't know how to carefully read this story, who will go around thinking that author of this story stated real facts, and that St. Patrick wasn't all that he was cracked up to be.
Typical for journalism these days. MSNBC...another nice hatchet job.
Just what you should expect from MSNBC these days. A bunch of sleaze that is all speculation and no proof.
@PghBill, @Jungle Jack,
Actually, words such as "likely", "might", "probably" and "could have" are very appropriate words for historians to use, particularly in the cases where the events they study occurred before their birth. The word I have a problem with is "scholar". This author is a writer of opinions. A scholar is also a writer of opinions if he/she interprets known facts. The difference is that the scholar will cite the sources that they use to opine. To paraphrase Mark Twain, "Be precise in your use of language. There is a difference between 'lightning' and 'lightning bug'."
St. Patrick well was my favorite Saint after looking at this He really isn't a saint he is more of a crappy man
Agreed!
Nice article,NOT, about research by an Anglican into the history of a Catholic Saint! Maybe he should do research about the Anglican (English) enslavement of the Irish Catholic people and see if he would be honest about what he finds.
Juliet and truthman
Sounds like you already had your mind made up about St. Patrick. You seem to be taking this authors words as fact. It's all speculation when he/she uses words like "maybe", "could", "probably", and "may have." Maybe you should do your own research before you believe some unidentified hack of an author of an article on MSNBC.
I like how this topic is no longer on the homepage. At least I don't see it now. Maybe MSNBC realizes it wasn't a very good idea for an article after all.
Author perhaps, scholar no.
The scholar described things that were the norm for someone in a position similar to that of St Patrick in those particular times. Why would it have differed for someone who later was named a saint?
The fact that the slave trade is abhorrent in our times doesn't mean that it was then. If you're going to pass judgement on either St Patrick or on this scholar, then do so by the standards of those times, not of these ones.
"may well have been a tax collector..."
Do you see how NBC constructed an entire story, without evidence?
It's the liberal media at it's best!
"MSNBC is a lineal descendant of Gen. David Sarnoff's National Broadcasting Company, which during the early- and mid-20th century may well have been a source of factual reporting and excellent overall journalism." At least, that's how the legend goes.
An urban legend.
MSNBC,
Did Bill Gates author, edit, contribute or approve of this unsigned article?
MSNBC- Yes very S L E A S Y for printing something from this source, without questioning the authors purpose, and motives as said by my comrads for free Nobal Journalism! St. Patricks story has been documented, and thouroughly researched for many years, by many scholars, to be true and accurate, a portrait of a man who through his own misfortunes, came to know the one True God, and spent the rest of his life as a missionary evangelizing Christ! HOW DARE YOU PRINT THIS LUNITEC'S STORY, WHEN IT'S SO OBVIOUS WHAT HE IS TRYING TO DO! NO PROOF, JUST HIS OWN TWISTED, BIASED OPINION OF A GREAT MAN! THINK IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON TO A DIFFERENT NEWS SOURCE!!!
Twolf- the fact that you say in your response "came to know the one True God" is just your own twisted, biased opinion. If you want to make an intelligent statement- please use spellcheck- It's comrades, not comrads; noble, not Nobal; thorough, not thourough; and lunatic's, not LUNITEC's. Also, you state that St. Patrick's story has been documented and thoroughly researched for many years, by many scolars- yet you don't name your sources or their motives.
Leonard...May I see your Spelling/Grammar Police Badge. I understood and you understood so who cares if he misspelled a few words....sheesh
Ye I am sure there are a few in my comment also...Go fo it!
Twolf made some very good points. You just look down on those without above average spelling abilities. If english was a second language for TWOLF would you give him more credit? The one true God was given many names through time. Allah, jehovah etc etc. I believe God was too smart to make ONE correct religeon to follow. To ridicule TWOLF for his beliefs shows how intolerant YOU are Mr. Caggianelli bring your nose down from the air and embrace other views.
Leonard, what does using spellcheck have to do with intelligence? Any fool can use it. Besides, St. Patrick did write that he came to know God, so how his that just Twolf's opinion?
It looks to me that the general consensus is Mr. Caggianelli is the one with a " twisted, biased opinion".
Heh... anyone else find it ironic that TWOLF spelled "scholars" correctly and Leonard didn't??? *giggle*
Good catch Momma...Sorry Leonard...You must turn in your Spelling Police badge
Thank you momma for pointing that out. I have a feeling Leonard will blame the dog for distracting him. Too intelligent to admit a mistake.
Leonard, I believe you have earned the MRP award for today. Oh, just in case you're not as smart as you think you are MRP stands for Most Ridiculous Post.
Actually, I thought that LUNAIETC was an obscure space-technology company with which I was unfamiliar, so spelling does matter at least "sum".
Why not print "The generally accepted account of the saint's life" for more balance!
Or all those documents that prove that the Messiah was actually born in Kenya, they have the same level of credibility and truthfulness.
Psst! Sean! I think he was referring to the POTUS ! Just sayin'
Sean, get a clue. Too funny.
I guess some people don't appreciate a convoluted sense of humor. Sean, I was not talking about our Lord, I was talking about the Messiah in the WH. And to be more clear, so you don't misunderstand me again, I am just saying that MSNBC should have treated this article the same way they treat a study proving that OBAMA was not born in the Good Old USA.
Shawn (sic), In that case your method of presenting your knowledge is as convoluted as my sense of humor.
I should think that if Patrick had wanted to transport a substantial amount of wealth from Britain to Ireland, the most convenient way would have been to convert his assets into money, not slaves. Acquiring, transporting and then reselling a herd of slaves, it seems to me, would have been somewhat cumbersome.
I just love how scholars "pick and choose" what history they want to revise, usually for a book deal. Next they'll be telling us that there's reasonable evidence the sun actually revolves around the earth, which, according to some recent research during a phone conversation, might actually be flat. Pffft...
Noam Chomsky must be pleased by this new attempt to rewrite history, really . . .
Really! :-o
The tongue-in-cheek story is that Patrick became a 'saint' because he chased all the snakes out of Ireland!
@DTrent
There's good evidence for that, based on the apparent fact that they wound up on Wall St, and some even went all the way to DC.
Snakes? AKA Serpents? AKA Demons? Probably so!
Where to start! So, Patrick in order to carry out missionary work in Ireland brought slaves as a form of portable capital? (a) did Mitt Romney, or any other person doing missionary work, bring all their capital with them when they moved to a new country? (b) as Patrick was an escaped slave, would the possibility of these slaves escaping not be a problem for him, surely it would have been easier to sell his slave (if he had any) and carry bullion, also he would need less guards to watch his bullion than he would to watch his slaves (and gold doesn't slit your neck in the middle of the night). This assumes he had slaves, which require (as stated) watching, feeding and clothing etc., which seems strange because he was trying to convert people to believe in Christ and one woul expect his first converts would have been his slaves, but Patrick was against Christians being taken into slavery (see his letter to Coroticus ).
This "Professor" questions Patrick's escape. Many have but the concept that he would not be able to brake loose, cross Ireland and get to Britain because he might be killed is stupid. He could possibly (we know nothing of Irish slavery laws) have been killed at any time, even for sport, like gladiators, and his escaped status would not have made a difference to his condition. The questions about his escape are the route he took, the similarities to biblical references and not to his legal status! In fact the ship he was on carried dogs, a very important commodity (and I assume easier to use as liquid assets than humans) that would have been traded with Britain or Continental Europe. Patrick refused to supplicate to the ships captain and the manner of supplication he mentions is backed up by archaeological evidence (the bog bodies in the National Museum, where one has his nipples removed, as sign that no one in the after life will supplicate to him), there is also the discovery, after Patrick prays, of pigs. The symbolism of this is known to anyone who knows medieval Irish cultures (see Scéla Muicce Meicc Da Thó ) Basically, Patrick's writings are backed up both by Archaeology and by other stories (legends, and histories).
As for Patrick not been accepted as a free man when he returned to Britain, Why? Was he branded a slave that all would notice? If so where or how would anyone in Britain know the marks of an Irish slave? Secondly, he didn't return straight to Britain (remember he went to a desert, like Moses, and that's where his prayers brought the sailors food in the form of the pigs). Thirdly, Cromwell enslaved people in Ireland, one of the slave traders captured an English lord, upon his escape from Barbados he returned to England. Why was he not immediately shipped back to Barbados (for this and more information on Irish slaves, read Rob Quinn's book To hell or Barbados)?
I could go on! But I shall end by reminding readers that this is not the first attack on Irishdom in relation to St. Patrick's day. Boris Johnson, the Mayor or London and the man about to host the Olympics in peace and sporting friendship, has recently had to apologise to the Irish community, and some years back Julie Burchill was lucky not to be prosecuted for her hate-crime against the Irish in Britain because of her comments about Ireland inspired by a St. Patrick's day parade in London.
Good read In Dublin - made the points I wanted to such as no mention that his slaves were most likely European. Example: Julius Caesar brought back a million people from Gaul. Huge numbers of people must have been enslaved after the conquest in Britain, and Strabo classified them among the goods exported from pre-Roman Britain to Gaul. The media is just saying slave trying to cause a problem knowing that most people think of slavery as that of the African. Just normal liberal media reporting.
Must MSNBC do a negative story about st patrick? Bad taste. On top of that.....boring and very poorly written. At one point EVERYBODY had slaves/servants, should we bastardize the stories of every saint and prophet of every faith? Nope...just the Catholics.
@Sean: NO ONE WORSHIS SAINTS! Also, There's no such thing as Santa Claus , the tooth fairy, etc... Sorry!
Catholics do not worship saints. You are making things up, don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION...... There is absolutely nothing anybody could say that would make me any more happy than I am right now, thank you. I have not practiced religion in quite some time but 99% of practicing people I meet are wonderful people and have empathy and try to live life and give life. The other one percent of every religion judges you unfairly, is unbelievably corrupt or trying to blow us up.
I said 99% of practicers. I did not say Catholics, I meant Hindu, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jewish, vegans...people who believe it is not ALL about themselves and aspire to to better. My issue is, on ANYBODY'S remembrance day there is always some antagonistic shrew that throws the 5% bad and forgets about the 95% good.
Sean, you have met fewer than 5 Christians in your life and not one Catholic? Maybe if your circle of life weren't so small you would have a better understanding of this conversation and be able to provideone sensible point.
Have you ever met a Muslim? Jew? Hindu? I have a friend of each and do not judge any of them based on religion or race. I hate mean people, it doesn't matter white, black or brown those are the people I shun.
99% of the followers of any religion cannot live by the ideals the heirarchy of their church asks of them. Look in the mirror, not at me.
There is not any one religion that has it all together. Any time you have humans involved, there will always be the possibility for things to go terribly wrong, AND for things to go astonishingly right!
I am not Irish, Catholic, or particularly fond of St. Patricks Day, but what a terrible article. Poorly written, everything in generalities, no solid evidence, published today clearly just to try and stir up controversy on someone else's holiday. It goes to show the moral compass of modern media that they would post this garbage.
More worthless crap from msnbc. And they still wonder why nbc viewers keep leaving for fox news....................
I agree. I view msnbc as the made up computer news agency. Investigative reporting to them is using the computer next to their office to find news.
Article: "But he added that his study had the advantage of being "free from the more reverential accounts of St. Patrick that have been handed down in legend through the generations."
But what the article is not free of is anti-Catholic bias.
This is nothing more than an opinion and a point of view. Who is to say what is right. Example: I think Obama is a horrible president and a lot of Democrats think he is good. I think Obama will be a one term president because he is harming America but some idiot history book author 100 years from now might write the history of a former country called the USA (it will happen if we don't get the Democrats out of office soon) was run by a great man named Obama as it fell into ruin.
Happy Saint Patrick’s Day to all the people murdered by him & his followers in the name of a God convert or die. Why wouldn’t you celebrate him?
What do you believe in? Does your family have blood on it's hands that should never be washed away? All your kids perfect? Extended family? Or shall you and your family be judged forever by something YOU did not do?
I believe we should never use a God to justify our killing or hate, do you have a problem with that?
Greene9 is a perfect example of somone who reads an article that offers no fact...just speculation...and he believes every word of it.
Nice going Greene9. MSNBC sucked you right in.
@Green9
I agree with you that nobody should use a God to justify killing or hate. I also believe that nobody should condemn people of faith who are moral, who wish to form a community, and who wish to help each other, for crimes committed by individuals who happen/happened to have chosen the same congregation. That would be akin to saying everybody in Congress and the White House should be impeached because presidents and congressmen in the 18th century owned slaves. (Hmmmm .... maybe that wasn't such a good example.)
Nope. Just never heard such hatred from a peaceful man before. You paint with such a broad brush and imply all religions are killing machines. When it has nothing to do with God at all. Whether Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or any form of government, it comes down to power and money. As long as you realize that and you hate the world equally then you are not the buffoon you appeared to be. The majority of religeous pratitioners are loving caring people and thought it funny you would s=h=it all over them for what? The crusades?.
Denverbill: I agree wholeheartedly with your recommendation re: Congress and the White House...but you're right. The example you chose (after the word "because") sort of shot the argument in the foot, as they say.
I know of everything you typed and then some Sean. I see governments and organized religions in the same light. I can even predict the future. 1) You will someday sue your local schools to ban the Pledge of Allegiance. 2) You will someday petition your town to ban a nativity scene 3) You will always be mean spirited.
Separation of church and state IS in the Bill of Rights. YOU apparently do not know why. It is to prevent the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT from forming their own religion.
are you old enough to be on here?
And equally to prevent it from adopting an existing one like Presbyterianism, Methodism, Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, etc.
Correct, but to twist that definition to push a zero tolerance policy in all things public is the government not allowing it's people to express themselves the way they choose.
How about this article caption MSNBC... Small cable news agency slammed for selling slaves. Hows that sound? Edgy enough? I make sure to diss MSNBC on a daily basis to help even the score.
It does give one pause to wonder!
Roman Empire was north and west of Italy! Roman slaves were white Europeans, but SLAVE is associated with BLACK in the US where the article is posted!
St Patrick is CATHOLIC which is a CHRISTIAN religion. He MAY HAVE sold slaves and had who knows what other skeletons in his closet!
If there is someone a Liberal doesn't like, they bring out the innuendo, the supposition, the conjecture and mist of rumor.
No reason at all to post an article of this type on St. Patrick's day, except now someone will quote a story they read on MSN that St. Patrick sold slaves and was not only Christian but a Catholic Cleric! So all Christians are bad, long live the non-Christian and sectarian Humanist.
They gloss over the fact that he did not want to remain a "TAX COLLECTOR" for a country that was in DECLINE because they found that they could vote themselves "BREAD and CIRCUSES" as long as they kept the current leaders in power! He rebelled against the system!
What ever may have taken place in Early Britain there is a copy of a letter written by St. Patrick condemning the practice of slavery. This would make him the first Christian cleric to take a stand against the practice.
My understanding is that St Patrick was not even Irish.
He was British.
Hey Michael-22, there it is, The Bush family are decendants of the English. The connection is complete, this explains everything!
Yes me too, and I will wear my pumpkins colored sweater today if I feel like it. This is America, not Ireland.
ER, just like the American Idiots running around during Cinco de Mayo?
'Aint history just grand!