:: wikimiki.org ::

Canonized

Canonized

:This article discusses the process of declaring saints. For the canonization of Scripture, see Biblical canon. Canonization is the process of declaring someone a saint and involves proving that a candidate has lived in such a way that he or she is worthy of sainthood. It is currently practiced by the Roman Catholic Church and its appendages, by the Eastern Orthodox Church, and by the Oriental Orthodox Churches.

Roman Catholicism

The process of an individual being declared a saint in the Roman Catholic Church began in the 900s, when the church in Rome demanded that all saints throughout her jurisdiction be added to an official list to be kept in Rome. Before that time, the name "saint" was applied more informally (as the plural form was often used in Scripture to designate the faithful), and many early saints have never been formally canonized. The first saint to be added to this official list was Saint Ulrich of Augsburg, who was canonized in 993. The process has become a detailed study of the life, writings, and after-life (miracles) of the candidate. The process involves several steps, including beatification, and the last is canonization. Canonization is taken very seriously. Most Roman Catholic theologians hold canonization to be an infallible act of the Church. In particular, Thomas Aquinas says, "Since the honor we pay the saints is in a certain sense a profession of faith, i.e., a belief in the glory of the Saints [quâ sanctorum gloriam credimus] we must piously believe that in this matter also the judgment of the Church is not liable to error."

Historical development of the process

According to some writers the origin of beatification and canonization in the Catholic Church is the ancient pagan apotheosis. Pope Benedict XIV examined and refuted this view. He showed that both the grounds for and meaning of apotheosis differ markedly from Christian beatification. Apotheosis often came from the statement of a single person that while the body of the new god was being burned, an eagle (for emperors) or a peacock (Juno's sacred bird) (for imperial consorts) was seen to carry heavenward the spirit of the departed (Livy, Hist. Rome, I, xvi; Herodian, Hist. Rome, IV, ii, iii). Apotheosis was awarded to most members of the imperial family, with no regard to virtues or remarkable achievements. Also, apotheosis was often given to escape popular hatred by distracting attention from the cruelty of imperial rulers. Romulus was deified by the senators who slew him; Poppaea owed her apotheosis to her imperial paramour, Nero, after he had kicked her to death; Geta had the honour from his brother Caracalla, who had got rid of him through jealousy. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, canonizes or beatifies only those whose lives have been marked by heroic virtue, and only after this has been proved by common repute for sanctity and by conclusive arguments. Finally, the Church sees saints as nothing more than friends and servants of God whose holy lives have nevertheless made them worthy of His special love. This is why Catholics do not "worship" saints. The origin of canonization and beatification comes from the Catholic doctrine of the devotion to, invocation and intercession of the saints. As was taught by St. Augustine, Catholics honour God in His saints as the loving distributor of supernatural gifts. Scholastic theologians have defined three types of worship. Strict adoration, or latria (λατρια), is given to God alone. Honor and humble reverence, or doulia (δουλια), is given to the saints. A higher form of doulia, hyperdoulia (υπερδουλια), is given to the Blessed Virgin Mary. The Church erects altars to God alone, though in honour and memory of the saints and martyrs. There is Scriptural warrant for such honor in the passages where we are bidden to venerate angels (Ex 13:20ff; Jos 5:13ff; Dan 8:15ff; 10:4ff; Luke 2:9ff; Acts 12:7ff; Rev 5:11ff; 7:1ff; Matt 18:10; etc.), whom holy men are not unlike, as sharers of the friendship of God. The basis of prayer to saints is simply that, as believers can help each other with prayers (intercessory prayer) while living, so they may pray for the living after their deaths. Thus, praying to St. Paul is a prayer asking Paul, alive in heaven, to pray for the believer. As Paul's holiness is attested in his beatification and canonization, his prayers will be well received. A different service is provided by the beatified in the celebrations of their feasts. In the celebrations of feasts, believers celebrate the holiness of the blessed and are reminded of their good examples. It follows naturally that for the public veneration of saints the ecclesiastical authority of the pastors and rulers of the Church was constantly required. The Church did not grant liturgical honours indiscriminately to all those who had died for the Faith. The first practice of beatification and canonization was directed toward martyrs. The decision as to the martyr having died for his faith in Christ, and the consequent permission of honor, lay originally with the bishop of the place in which he had borne his testimony. The bishop inquired into the motive of his death and, finding he had died a martyr, sent his name with an account of his martyrdom to other churches, especially neighboring ones, so that, in event of approval by their respective bishops, the cultus of the martyr might extend to their churches also. The honoring of "confessors" -- of those, that is, who died peacefully after a life of heroic virtue -- is not as ancient as that of the martyrs. In the beginning, "confessor" denoted only those who confessed Christ when examined in the presence of enemies of the Faith, or, as Pope Benedict XIV explains, to those who died peacefully after having confessed the faith before tyrants or other enemies of the Christian religion, and undergone tortures or suffered other punishments of whatever nature. Later on, confessors were those who had lived a holy life and closed it by a holy death in Christian peace. It is in this sense that we now treat of the honor paid to confessors. It was in the fourth century that confessors were first given public ecclesiastical honor, though occasionally praised in ardent terms by earlier Fathers. Still Robert Bellarmine thought it uncertain when confessors began to be objects of public veneration, and asserted that it was not before 800, when the feasts of Sts. Martin of Tours and Remigius are found in the catalog of feasts drawn up by the Council of Mainz. However, in the East, for example, Hilarion, Ephrem of Syria, and other confessors were publicly honoured in the fourth century; and, in the West, St. Martin of Tours, and St. Hilary of Poitiers were objects of a like honor in the same century. Later on, the names of confessors were inserted in the diptychs, and due reverence was paid them. Their tombs were honored with the same title as those of the martyrs. It remained true, however, that one could not venerate confessors without permission of the ecclesiastical authority. For several centuries the bishops, in some places only the primates and patriarchs, could grant martyrs and confessors public ecclesiastical honor; such honor, however, was always decreed only for the local territory over which the grantors held jurisdiction. Still, it was only the Bishop of Rome's (Pope's) acceptance of the honor that made it universal, since he alone could permit or command in the Universal Church. Abuses, however, crept into this form of discipline, due to popular fervour and the carelessness of some bishops in inquiring into the lives of those whom they permitted to be honored as saints. Towards the close of the eleventh century the popes found it necessary to restrict episcopal authority on this point and decreed that the virtues and miracles of persons proposed for public veneration should be examined in councils. Even after these decrees, "some, following the ways of the pagans and deceived by the fraud of the evil one, venerated as a saint a man who had been killed while intoxicated". Pope Alexander III (1159 - 1181) prohibited popular veneration in these words: "For the future you will not presume to pay him reverence, as, even though miracles were worked through him, it would not allow you to revere him as a saint unless with the authority of the Roman Church." Thus, the pope for the first time reserved the right of beatification. Some bishops did not obey it in as far as it regarded beatification (which right they had certainly possessed before this), so Urban VII published, in 1634, a Bull which put an end to all discussion by reserving to the Holy See exclusively not only its immemorial right of canonization, but also that of beatification.

Current practice

The 1983 reform of the Roman Catholic Church's canon law has streamlined the procedure considerably compared to the process carried out previously. (See below.) The process begins at the diocesan level, with the bishop giving permission to open an investigation of the virtues of the person who is suspected of having been a saint. This investigation may not open until permission is given by the Vatican, and not sooner than five years after the death of the person being investigated. However, the pope has the authority to waive this waiting period, as was done for Mother Teresa by Pope John Paul II as well as John Paul II by his successor, Benedict XVI. When sufficient information has been gathered, the subject of the investigation is called a "Servant of God", and the process is transferred to the Roman Curia—the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints—where it is assigned a postulator, whose task is to gather all information about the life of the Servant of God. When enough information has been gathered, the congregation will recommend to the pope that he make a proclamation of the Servant of God's heroic virtue, which entitles him or her to receive the title "Venerable". A Venerable has as of yet no feast day, but prayer cards may be printed to encourage the faithful to pray for a miracle wrought by his or her intercession. The next step depends on whether the Venerable is a martyr. For a martyr, the pope has only to make a declaration of martyrdom, which then allows beatification, yielding the title "Blessed" and a feast day in the Blessed's home diocese and perhaps some other local calendars. If the Venerable was not a martyr, it must be proven that a miracle has taken place by his or her intercession. Today, these miracles are almost always miraculous cures, as these are the easiest to establish based on the Roman Catholic Church's requirements for a "miracle." (The patient was sick, there was no known cure for the ailment, prayers were directed to the Venerable, the patient was cured, and doctors cannot explain it.) To pass from Blessed to Saint, one (more) miracle is necessary. A saint's feast day is considered universal, and may be celebrated anywhere within the Catholic church, although it may not appear on the general calendar. In the case of persons that common usage has called saints from "time immemorial" (in practice, since before 1500 or so), the Church may carry out a "confirmation of cultus", which is much simpler. For example, Saint Hermann Joseph had his veneration confirmed by Pope John Paul II.

Previous practice

Main article: Historical process of beatification and canonization The process for making a saint was considerably more involved. To achieve the declaration of venerability, the process was essentially the same, but with more people and reports involved. Beatification of a non-martyr required three miracles if direct witnesses to his or her sanctity could be called, and four if this was not possible. For a martyr, one miracle less was needed, and the requirement of miracles could be waived by the Congregation of Rites. Two additional miracles were required for the canonization.

External link

- [http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/practices/honoring_saints/canonization.htm Canonization of Saints] - Describes the significance and process of canonizing saints.
- [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm Entry on canonization and beatification in the Catholic Encyclopedia] Category:Sainthood ja:列聖

Biblical canon

The Biblical canon is an exclusive list of books written during the formative period of the Jewish or Christian faiths; the leaders of these communities believed these books to be inspired by God or to express the authoritative history of the relationship between God and his people (although there may have been secondary considerations as well). There are differences between Christians and Jews, as well as between different Christian traditions, over which books meet the standards for canonization. The different criteria for, and the process of, canonization for each community dictates what members of that community consider to be their Bible. At this time, all of the below canons are considered to be closed; that is, most adherents of the various groups do not think that additional books can be added to their Bible. By contrast, an open canon would be a list of books which is considered to be open to additional books, should they meet the other criteria. Each of the canons described below was considered open for a time before being closed. Generally, the closure of the canon reflects a belief from the faith community that the formative period of the religion has ended, and that texts from that period can be collected into an authoritative body of work. Certain Christian churches (such as the Latter-day Saints) which accept a Bible as part of their formally adopted sacred literature may also include other works in the totality of their canon, but they generally do not consider those other works to be part of their Bible. See Sacred text for examples. The relationship between the closing of the canon and beliefs about the nature of revelation may be subject to different interpretations. Some believe that the closing of the canon signals the end of a period of divine revelation; others believe that revelation continues even after the canon is closed, either through individuals or through the leadership of a divinely sanctioned religious institution. Among those who believe that revelation continues after the canon is closed, there is further debate about what kinds of revelation is possible, and whether the revelation can add to established theology.

Canonic texts in Jewish and Christian traditions

Traditionally more open to discussion and editorial interpretation is the concept of a canonic text, that is, a single, authoritative text for each of the books in the canon, one which depends on editorial selections from among manuscript traditions that had been independent of one another. Significant separate manuscript traditions in the canonic Hebrew Bible are represented in the Septuagint translation's variants from the Masoretic text that was established through the Masoretes' scholarly collation of varying manuscripts, and in the independent manuscript traditions that are represented by the Dead Sea scrolls. Additional, otherwise unrecorded texts for Genesis and the early chapters of Exodus lie behind the Book of Jubilees. These, and the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves, emphasize that even canonic Hebrew texts did not possess any single hard and fast authorized manuscript tradition, in the first centuries BCE. New Testament Greek and Latin texts presented enough significant differences that a manuscript tradition arose of presenting diglot texts, with Greek and Latin on facing pages. Jerome's Vulgate was a successful attempt at establishing a canonic text, one that passed without challenge until the humanist textual inquiries of the 15th and 16th centuries.

Jewish canon

:See also: Tanakh The Jews recognize the twenty-four books of the Hebrew Bible as the Tanakh. Evidence suggests that the process of canonization of the Tanakh occurred between 200 BCE and 200 CE. The first suggestion of a Jewish Canon comes in the 2nd century BCE. The book of 2 Maccabees, itself not a part of the Jewish canon, describes Nehemiah (around 400 BCE) as having "founded a library and collected books about the kings and prophets, and the writings of David, and letters of kings about votive offerings" (2 Macc 2:13). The book also suggests that Ezra brought the Torah back from Babylon to Jerusalem and the Second Temple as described in Nehemiah 8. Both I and II Maccabees suggest that Judas Maccabeus likewise collected sacred books. They do not, however, suggest that the canon was at that time closed; moreover, it is not clear that these sacred books were identical to those that later became part of the canon. Additional evidence of a collection of sacred scripture similar to portions of the Hebrew Bible comes from the book of Sirach (dating from 180 BCE and also not included in the Jewish canon), which includes a list of names of great men in the same order as is found in the Torah and the Nevi'im (Prophets), and which includes the names of some men mentioned in the Ketuvim (Writings). Based on this list of names, some scholars have conjectured that the author, Yeshua ben Sira (Jesus son of Sirach) had access to, and considered authoritative, the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve minor prophets. His list excludes names from Ruth, Song of Songs, Esther, Daniel, and Job, suggesting that he either did not have access to these books, or did not consider them authoritative. In the prologue to the Greek translation of ben Sirach's work, his grandson mentions both the Torah and the Nevi'im, as well as a third group of books which is not yet named as Ketuvim (the prologue simply identifies "the rest of the books"). Based on this evidence, some scholars have suggested that by the 2nd century BCE the books of the Torah and Nevi'im were considered canonical, but that the books of the Ketuvim were not. The Septuagint (LXX) translation of the Hebrew language Bible into Koine Greek, probably in the 1st and 2nd centuries BCE, provided a text (there are variants) for the Greek-speaking world, and was used by the writers of the New Testament. In this text (actually scrolls rather than a book) the Torah and Nevi'im are established as canonical, but again, Ketuvim have not yet been definitively canonized (some editions of the Septuagint include, for instance I-IV Maccabees or the 151st Psalm, while others do not include them, also there are the Septuagint additions to Esther, Jeremiah, and Daniel and 1 Esdras). The Dead Sea Scrolls discovered at caves near Qumran refer to the Torah and Nevi'im and suggest that these portions of the Bible had already been canonized before 68 CE. A scroll that contains all or parts of 41 Biblical psalms, although not in the same order as in the current Book of Psalms, and which includes eight texts not found in the Book of Psalms, suggests that the Book of Psalms had not yet been canonized. In the first century CE, Philo Judaeus of Alexandria discussed sacred books, but made no mention of a tripartite division of the Bible, however, in De vita contemplativa[http://earlyjewishwritings.com/text/philo/book34.html], a disputed text, v.25, is stated: "studying ... the laws and the sacred oracles of God enunciated by the holy prophets, and hymns, and psalms, and all kinds of other things by reason of which knowledge and piety are increased and brought to perfection." Josephus, however, refers to sacred scriptures divided into three parts: the five books of the Torah; thirteen books of the Nevi'im, and four other books of hymns and wisdom. The number of 22 books mentioned by Josephus does not correspond to the number of books in the current canon. Some scholars have suggested that he considered Ruth part of Judges, and Lamentations part of Jeremiah. Other scholars suggest that at the time Josephus wrote, such books as Esther and Ecclesiastes were not yet considered canonical. Significantly, Josephus characterizes the 22 books as canonical because they were divinely inspired; he mentions other historical books that were not divinely inspired and that therefore do not belong in the canon. The first reference to a 24-book Jewish canon is found in 2 Esdras 14:45-46, which was probably written in the first half of the second century CE: :"Make public the twenty-four books that you wrote first, and let the worthy and the unworthy read them; but keep the seventy that were written last, in order to give them to the wise among your people." RSV The "seventy" might refer to the Septuagint, apocrypha, or mystical works. The Pharisees also debated the status of these extra-canonical books; in the 2nd century CE, Rabbi Akiva declared that those who read them would not share in the afterlife (Sanhedrin 10:1). The Mishnah, compiled by the second century CE, describes some of the debate over the status of some books of Ketuvim, and in particular whether or not they render the hands "impure". Yadaim 3:5 calls attention to the debate over Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes. The Megillat Taanit, in a discussion of days when fasting is prohibited but that are not noted in the Bible, mentions the holiday of Purim. Based on these, and a few similar references, Heinrich Graetz concluded in 1871 that there had been a "synod" at "Jamnia" (or Yavne in Hebrew) which had decided Jewish canon sometime in the late 1st century. This became the prevailing scholarly consensus for much of the 20th century. However, from the 1960s onwards, based on the work of J.P. Lewis, S.Z. Leiman, and others, this view came increasingly into question. In particular, later scholars noted that none of the sources actually mentioned books that had been withdrawn from a canon, and questioned the whole premise that the discussions were about canonicity at all, asserting that they were actually dealing with other concerns entirely. Today, there is no scholarly consensus as to when the Jewish canon was set.

Samaritan canon

The small community of the remnants of the Samaritans in Palestine includes only their version of the Torah and the book of Joshua in their canon. This grouping is sometimes referred to as the Hexateuch. The Samaritan community possesses a copy of the Torah that they believe to have been penned by Aaron himself.

Christian canon

Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant

When Christianity began: it had no well-defined set of scriptures outside of the Septuagint. The New Testament refers to the "Law and Prophets", for example the Gospel of Luke 24:44 records Jesus stating: "written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms". The earliest Christian canon is found in the Bryennios manuscript, published by J.-P. Audet in JTS[http://jts.oxfordjournals.org/] 1950, v1, pp 135-154, dated to around 100 AD, written in Koine Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew; it is this 27-book OT list: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth, 4 of Kings (Samuel and Kings), 2 of Chronicles, 2 of Esdras (might include 1 Esdras), Esther (might include Septuagint additions), Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job, Minor prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah (might include Septuagint additions), Ezekiel, Daniel (might include Septuagint additions). Early Christianity also relied on the [http://www.scripturecatholic.com/oral_tradition.html Sacred Oral Tradition] of what Jesus had said and done, as reported by the apostles and other followers. Even after the Gospels were written and began circulating, some Christians preferred the oral Gospel as told by people they trusted (e.g. Papias, c. 125 AD). By the end of the 1st century, some Letters of Paul were collected and circulated, and were known to Clement of Rome (c. 95 AD), Ignatius of Antioch (died 117 AD), and Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 115 AD) but they weren't called scripture as the Septuagint was and they weren't without critics. In the late 4th century Epiphanius of Salamis (died 402) Panarion 29 says the Nazarenes had rejected the Pauline epistles and Irenaeus Against Heresies 26.2 says the Ebionites rejected him. Acts 21:21 records a rumor that Paul aimed to subvert the Old Testament. 2 Peter 3:16 says his letters have been abused by heretics who twist them around. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 6.38 says the Elchasai "made use of texts from every part of the Old Testament and the Gospels; it rejects the Apostle (Paul) entirely"; 4.29.5 says Tatian the Assyrian rejected Paul's Letters and Acts of the Apostles; 6.25 says Origen accepted 22 canonical books of the Hebrews plus Maccabees plus the four Gospels but Paul "did not so much as write to all the churches that he taught; and even to those to which he wrote he sent but a few lines." Bruce Metzger in his Canon of the New Testament, 1997, draws the following conclusion about Clement:

Clement's Bible is the Old Testament, to which he refers repeatedly as Scripture (graphe), quoting it with more or less exactness. Clement also makes occasional reference to certain words of Jesus; though they are authoritative for him, he does not appear to enquire how their authenticity is ensured. In two of the three instances that he speaks of remembering 'the words' of Christ or of the Lord Jesus, it seems that he has a written record in mind, but he does not call it a 'gospel'. He knows several of Paul's epistles, and values them highly for their content; the same can be said of the Epistle to the Hebrews, with which he is well acquainted. Although these writings obviously possess for Clement considerable significance, he never refers to them as authoritative 'Scripture'.

Marcion of Sinope: c. 150, was the first of record to propose a definitive, exclusive, unique canon of Christian scriptures. He rejected the teachings of the Old Testament, which he claimed were incompatible with the teachings of Jesus. The Gospel of Luke, which Marcion called simply the "Gospel", he edited to remove any passages that connected Jesus with the Old Testament. This was because he believed that the god of the Jews, YHWH, who gave them the Law of Moses, was an entirely different god than the Supreme God who sent Jesus and inspired the New Testament. By editing he thought he was removing judaizing corruptions and recovering the original inspired words of Jesus. He also used ten Letters of Paul (excluding Hebrews and the Pastoral Epistles) assuming his Epistle to the Laodiceans refered to canonical Ephesians and not apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans or another text no longer extant. To these, which he called the Gospel and the Apostolicon, he added his Antithesis which contrasted the New Testament with the Old Testament. Marcion's canon and theology were soundly rejected as heretical; however, he forced other Christians to consider which texts were canonical and why. He spread his beliefs widely; they became known as Marcionism. Henry Wace in his introduction [http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/info/marcion-wace.html] of 1911 stated: "A modern divine ... could not refuse to discuss the question raised by Marcion, whether there is such opposition between different parts of what he regards as the word of God, that all cannot come from the same author." The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1913 stated: "they were perhaps the most dangerous foe Christianity has ever known." Diatessaron: c. 173, a one-volume harmony of the four Gospels, translated and compiled by Tatian the Assyrian into Syriac. In Syriac speaking churches, it effectively served as the only New Testament scripture until Paul's Letters were added during the 3rd century. Some believe that Acts was also used in Syrian churches alongside the Diatessaron , however, Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History 4.29.5 states Tatian rejected Paul's Letters and Acts. The Diatessaron was eventually replaced in the 5th century by the Peshitta, which contains a translation of all the books of the 27-book NT except for 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation and is the Bible of the Syriac Orthodox Church where some members believe it is the original New Testament, see Aramaic primacy. Irenaeus of Lyons: c. 185, claimed that there were exactly four Gospels, no more and no less, as a touchstone of orthodoxy. He argued that it was illogical to reject Acts of the Apostles but accept the Gospel of Luke, as both were from the same author. In Against Heresies 3.12.12 [http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-60.htm#P7525_2024213] he ridiculed those who think they are wiser than the Apostles because they were still under Jewish influence. This was crucial to refuting Marcion's anti-Judaizing, as Acts gives honor to James, Peter, John and Paul alike. At the time, Jewish Christians tended to honor James (a prominent Christian in Jerusalem described in the New Testament as an apostle and pillar, and by Eusebius and other church historians as the first Bishop of Jerusalem) but not Paul, while Pauline Christianity tended to honor Paul more than James. Muratorian fragment [http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/muratorian.html]: often considered the first non-Marcion New Testament canon, is often dated at 170 (based on an internal reference to Pope Pius I and arguments put forth by Bruce Metzger) but more likely as late as the end of the 4th century according to the Anchor Bible Dictionary. This partial canon lists the four gospels and the Letters of Paul, as well as two books of Revelation, one of John, another of Peter (the latter of which it notes is not often read in the churches). It rejects the Epistle to the Laodiceans and Epistle to the Alexandrians both said to be forged in Paul's name to support Marcionism. Eusebius: c. 300, listed a New Testament canon in his Ecclesiastical History 3.3 and 3.25[http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-01/Npnf2-01-08.htm#P1497_696002]: Recognized are four Gospels, Acts, 10 traditional Letters of Paul, Pastoral Epistles, 1st Peter, 1st John; Disputed are Didache, Barnabas, Hermas, Diatessaron, Gospel of the Hebrews, Hebrews, Acts of Paul, James, 2nd Peter, 2-3 John, Jude, Revelation, Apocalypse of Peter; Rejected are Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Matthias, Acts of Andrew, Acts of John, and unnamed others. Codex Claromontanus canon [http://www.bible-researcher.com/claromontanus.html]: c. 350, has the 27-book OT plus Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, 1-2,4 Maccabees, Barnabas, Hermas and the 27-book NT plus 3rd Corinthians, Acts of Paul, Apocalypse of Peter but missing Philippians, 1-2 Thessalonians, and Hebrews. Cheltenham Canon [http://www.bible-researcher.com/cheltenham.html]: also known as Mommsen's, c. 350, has a 24 book OT and 24 book NT which omits Hebrews, Jude and James. Synod of Laodicea: c. 363, was one of the first synods that set out to judge which books were to be read aloud in churches. The decrees issued by the thirty or so clerics attending were called canons. Canon 59 decreed that only canonical books should be read, but no list was appended in the Latin and Syriac manuscripts recording the decrees. The list of canonical books, Canon 60 [http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.lxv.html], sometimes attributed to the Synod of Laodicea is a later addition according to most scholars and has a 22 book OT and 26-book NT (excludes Revelation). Athanasius: in 367, in Festal Letter 39 [http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-04/Npnf2-04-93.htm] listed a 22 book OT and 27-book NT and 7 books not in the canon but to be read: Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, Didache, and the Pastor (probably Hermas). If you ignore the additional books to be read and exclusion of Esther from the canon, this list is the same as the modern Protestant canon and so Athanasius is often considered the father of the modern Protestant canon. Pope Damasus I: is often considered to be the father of the modern Catholic canon. Though purporting to date from a "Council of Rome" under Pope Damasus I in 382, the so-called "Damasian list" appended to the pseudepigraphical Decretum Gelasianum [http://www.tertullian.org/decretum_eng.htm] is actually a valuable though non-papal list from the early 6th century. Denziger's recension is found in the links at Decretum Gelasianum. The "Damasian Canon" was published by C.H. Turner in JTS, vol. 1, 1900, pp 554-560. In 405, Pope Innocent I in Letter #6 (to Exuperius) described a canon identical to Trent (without the distinction between protocanonicals and deuterocanonicals). 3rd Synod of Carthage [http://www.ntcanon.org/Carthage.canon.shtml]: in 397, ratified the canon accepted previously at the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa, 393, the acts of which have been lost. The canon of the Synod of Hippo was supposedly endorsed by Pope Damasus I. When St. Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, producing the Vulgate bible, he argued for the Veritas Hebraica, meaning the truth of the Jewish Bible over the Septuagint translation. At the insistence of the Pope, however, he added existing translations for what he considered doubtful books, but did not personally translate them anew. This period marks the beginning of a more widely recognized canon. The inclusion of some books were still debated: Epistle to Hebrews, James, 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation. Grounds for debate included the question of authorship of these books (note that the so-called Damasian "Council at Rome" had already rejected John the Apostle's authorship of 2 and 3 John, while retaining the books); suitability for use; and how widely they were actually being used. 2 Peter is the most weakly attested of all the books in the Christian canon. One concern regarding the book of Revelation at that time is that it was already being interpreted in a wide variety of heretical ways. List of the Sixty Books [http://www.ntcanon.org/Sixty_Canonical_Books.shtml]: dated to the 7th century, has 34 OT books and 26-book NT (excludes Revelation) and 9 books "outside the sixty": Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, 1-4 Maccabees, Esther, Judith, Tobit and a 25 book apocrypha. Orthodox Synod in Trullo: in 692, rejected by Pope Constantine, approved Gregory Theologus' 22 book OT and 26-book NT (excludes Revelation) and the Apostolic Canons of the Apostolic Constitutions of which Canon #85 [http://www.bible-researcher.com/apostolic.html] is a list of the 27-book OT plus Judith, Sirach, 1-3Maccabees, Didache, 1-2Clement, and 26-book NT (excludes Revelation), and the Apostolic Constitutions which themselves were rejected because they were said to contain heretical interpolations. John of Damascus: c. 654 - c. 749, in Exact Exposition of Orthodox Faith 4.17 accepted Didache and Apostolic Constitutions. Nicephorus: the Patriarch of Jerusalem, 806-815, in a Stichometria [http://www.ntcanon.org/Stichometry_of_Nicephorus.shtml] appended to the end of his Chronography rejected Esther, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Maccabees, Psalms of Solomon, Enoch, Didache, Barnabas, Hermas, Clement, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of the Hebrews, 3rd Corinthians, Acts of Paul, Revelation, Apocalypse of Peter. Protestant Reformation: begun by Martin Luther, who made an attempt to remove the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation from the canon (partially because they were perceived to go against certain Protestant doctrines such as sola fide, partially because of the early debate over their inclusion), but this was not generally accepted among his followers. However, these books are ordered last in German-language Lutheran Bibles to this day. Bruce Metzger's Canon of the New Testament says in 1596 Jacob Lucius published a Bible at Hamburg which labeled Luther's four as "Apocrypha"; David Wolder the pastor of Hamburg's Church of St. Peter published in the same year a triglot Bible which labeled them as "non canonical"; J. Vogt published a Bible at Goslar in 1614 similar to Lucius'; Gustavus Adolphus of Stockholm in 1618 published a Bible with them labeled as "Apocr(yphal) New Testament." Luther also eliminated the "doubtful" books from his Old Testament, terming them "Apocrypha, that are books which are not considered equal to the Holy Scriptures, but are useful and good to read". He also argued unsuccessfully for the relocation of Esther from the Canon to the Apocrypha, since without the deuterocanonical sections, it never mentions God. As a result Catholics and Protestants continue to use different canons, which differ in respect to the Old Testament. There is some evidence that the first decision to omit these books entirely from the Bible was made by Protestant laity rather than clergy. Bibles dating from shortly after the Reformation have been found whose tables of contents included the entire Roman Catholic canon, but which did not actually contain the disputed books, leading some historians to think that the workers at the printing presses took it upon themselves to omit them. However, Anglican and Lutheran Bibles usually still contained these books until the 20th century, while Calvinist Bibles did not. Several reasons are proposed for the omission of these books from the canon. One is the support for Catholic doctrines such as Purgatory and prayer for the dead found in 2 Maccabees. Luther himself said he was following Jerome's teaching about the Veritas Hebraica. Council of Trent: on April 8, 1546, by vote (24 yea, 15 nay, 16 abstain) approved the present Roman Catholic Bible Canon including the Deuterocanonical Books. This is said to be the same list as produced at the Council of Florence in 1451, this list was defined as canonical in the profession of faith proposed for the Jacobite Orthodox Church. Because of its placement, the list was not considered binding for the Catholic church, and in light of Martin Luther's demands, the Catholic Church examined the question of the Canon again at the Council of Trent, which reaffirmed the Canon of the Council of Florence. The Old Testament books that had been in doubt were termed deuterocanonical, not indicating a lesser degree of inspiration, but a later time of final approval. Beyond these books, some editions of the latin Vulgate include Psalm 151, the Prayer of Manasseh, 1 Esdras (called 3 Esdras), 2 Esdras (called 4 Esdras), and the Epistle to the Laodiceans in an appendix, styled "Apogryphi". Thirty-Nine Articles: in 1563, of the Church of England, article 6, recognized the Roman Catholic Canon including the Deuterocanonicals with the caveat "for example of life and instruction in manners ... [but not] to establish any doctrine." King James Bible: of 1611, included deuterocanon and apocrypha from the Vulgate and Septuagint. Westminster Confession of Faith: in 1647, of Calvinism, decreed a 39-book OT and 27-book NT, all others labelled as apocrypha [http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/]. Synod of Jerusalem: in 1672, decreed the Greek Orthodox Canon which is the same as the Roman Catholic but includes Psalm 151, 1 Esdras, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, and Psalms of Solomon. The Greek Orthodox generally consider the Septuagint to be divinely inspired. Thomas Jefferson: in 1819, produced the Jefferson Bible, by excluding sayings of Jesus which he felt were easily determined to be inauthentic ("like picking diamonds from dunghills" -To Adams, Jan 24, 1814). Vatican I: on April 24, 1870, approved the additions to Mark (v.16:9-20), Luke, (22:19b-20,43-44) and John, (7:53-8:11) which are not present in early manuscripts. Pope Pius XI: on June 2, 1927, decreed the Comma Johanneum was open to dispute. Jesus Seminar: in 1993, ranked sayings of Jesus for authenticity by vote and published The Five Gospels : What Did Jesus Really Say? The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus. In addition to the canonical four gospels, the fifth gospel is the Gospel of Thomas. Many Christians have accepted and continue to accept the same 27-book NT, except for the Syriac Orthodox Church who continue to use the Peshitta and the Ethiopian Orthodox Church (which lists four books of Sinodos (church practices), two Books of Covenant, "Ethiopic Clement", and "Ethiopic Didascalia" within a broader New Testament canon, although their narrow canon is the same as that of other churches; see [http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/ethiopican.html this webpage] for much more detailed information on the Ethiopian Canon) and the Armenian Orthodox who include the Third Epistle to the Corinthians. The Canon of the Tewahedo Church is looser than for most other traditional Christian groups. The Ethiopian "narrow" Old Testament Canon includes the books found in the Septuagint accepted by the Orthodox plus Enoch, Jubilees, 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, 3 Maccabees, and Psalm 151; but their three books of the Maccabees are quite different in content from those of the other Christian churches which include them. The order of the other books is somewhat different from other groups', as well. This Church also has a "broader canon" that includes more books. The books that were not accepted, but that are known to have existed in antiquity, are stylistically or in subject matter similar to the New Testament, and claim apostolic authorship, are generally termed New Testament apocrypha.

Baptist, Church of God, and Selected Evangelicals

Many other Christian groups, such as most Baptist and Church of God groups, do not accept the theory that the Christian Bible was not known until various Roman-dominated Councils made their official declarations. These groups believe that the New Testament supports that Paul (2 Timothy 4:11-13), Peter (2 Peter 3:15-16), and ultimately John (Revelation 22:18-19) finalized the canon of the New Testament. They note that Peter, John, and Paul wrote 21 of the 27 books of the NT (plus, between them, they personally knew all the other NT writers). They also tend not to accept the Septuagint as the correct Hebrew Bible (nor do many Protestants); they claim that the Masoretic text was known and used by the end of the first Century. They note that early Christians knew the Hebrew Bible since around 170 A.D. Melito of Sardis listed all the books of the Old Testament that those in the Protestant, Baptist, and Church of God faiths now use (except, according the Catholic Encyclopedia, the Book of Esther). Melito's canon is found in Eusebius EH4.26.13-14 [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250104.htm]:

Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth; of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book ; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books.

Modern interpretation of canonization

Many modern Protestants point to four "Criteria for Canonicity" to justify the books that have been included in the Old and New Testament, which are judged to have satisfied the following: #Apostolic Origin — attributed to and based on the preaching/teaching of the first-generation apostles (or their close companions). #Universal Acceptance — acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the ancient world (by the end of the fourth century). #Liturgical Use — read publicly when early Christian communities gathered for the Lord's Supper (their weekly worship services). #Consistent Message — containing a theological outlook similar or complementary to other accepted Christian writings. The basic factor for recognizing a book's canonicity for the New Testament was divine inspiration, and the chief test for this was apostolicity. The term apostolic as used for the test of canonicity does not necessarily mean apostolic authorship or derivation, but rather apostolic authority. Apostolic authority is never detached from the authority of the Lord. See Apostolic succession. It is sometimes difficult to apply these criteria to all books in the accepted canon, however, and some point to books that Protestants hold as apocryphal which would fulfill these requirements. In practice, Protestants hold to the Jewish canon for their Old Testament and the Catholic canon for their New Testament.

Latter-day Saint Scripture

Latter Day Saint churches include the Old Testament and New Testament (without the Apocrypha) in their canon, but also include books that the Saints believe to be of ancient origin, even though they were first published in the 19th century in English. See Golden Plates for details. This usually includes the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price. Additionally, the Doctrine and Covenants is a continually expanding work written and published in modern times and considered canonical by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (by far the largest sect), though some LDS sects do not accept it. The smaller Community of Christ has an authorized canon of three books. They use an edition of the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible known as the Inspired version, along with more modern translations. They accept the Book of Mormon as divinely inspired. They also use a version of the Doctrine and Covenants common to the Latter Day Saint editions up to 1844 but which differs in content after the schism which occured following the 1844 death of Joseph Smith, Jr.. Judaism, and most other Christians do not accept these works as canon, and mostly regard them with ambivalence or rejection, regarding them instead to be original to the 19th century and not translations of ancient texts. Most LDS faiths respect the free practice of other religions as enshrined in their Articles of Faith, but insist that the LDS canon are not apocryphal nor forged. See also Mormonism and Judaism and Mormonism and Christianity.

Footnotes

- Assuming Koine Greek primacy, which is the majority view, however, a small minority assume Aramaic primacy, meaning an original Aramaic Gospel which would cite the Aramaic Old Testament.

References

- Anchor Bible Dictionary
- Ante-Nicene Fathers, Eerdmans Press
- Apostolic Fathers, Lightfoot-Harmer-Holmes, ISBN 0801056764
- Encyclopedia of the Early Church, Oxford
- Beckwith, R.T. OT Canon of the NT Church ISBN 0802836178
- Brakke, David. "Canon formation and social conflict in fourth century Egypt," in Harvard Theological Review 87:4 (1994) pp 395 – 419. Athanasius' role in the formation of the N.T. canon.
- Bruce, F.F., Canon of Scripture ISBN 083081258X
- Davis, L.D. First Seven Ecumenical Councils ISBN 0814656161
- Ferguson Encyclopedia of Early Christianity
- Fox, Robin Lane. The Unauthorized Version. 1992. A classical historian dispassionately discusses the formation of the canons.
- Gamble. NT Canon ISBN 0800704709
- Hennecke-Schneemelcher. NT Apcrypha
- Jurgens, W.A. Faith of the Early Fathers ISBN 0814656161
- Metzger, Bruce. Canon of the NT ISBN 0198261802
- John Salza, [http://www.scripturecatholic.com/ Scripture Catholic], [http://www.scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html Septuagint references]
- Sundberg. OT of the Early Church Harvard Press 1964

External links

- [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: Canon of the Old Testament]
- [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: Canon of the New Testament]
- [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1025&letter=B&search=Bible%20canon Jewish Encyclopedia: Bible Canon]
- [http://www.ntcanon.org/lists.shtml Development of the Canon of the New Testament]
- [http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/index.htm Noncanonical Literature]
- [http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ Early Christian Writings]
- [http://www.nag-hammadi.com/ The Nag Hammadi library]
- [http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html Gnostic Society Library page on The Nag Hammadi library]
- [http://www.ubs-translations.org/tictalk/tt45.html United Bible Societies, Translation Information Clearinghouse: Canon Update] Annotated bibliography of recently published research Category:Christian texts Category:Jewish Christian topics Category:Bible ja:正典

Saint

In general, the term Saint refers to someone who is exceptionally virtuous and holy. It can be applied to both the living and the dead and is an acceptable term in most of the world's popular religions. The Saint is held up by the community as an example of how we all should act, and his or her life story is usually recorded for the edification of future generations. The process of officially recognizing a person as a Saint, practiced by some churches, is called canonization and serves to hold up those individuals as role models and heroes of Christian virtue. Protestant groups object to this and use only the less formal, broader usage seen in Scripture to include all who are faithful as saints.

Etymology

The term Saint is derived from the Latin Sanctus meaning “Holy”. This is a direct translation from the Greek word άγιος (hagios) also meaning “Holy”. In its original scriptural usage it simply means “Holy” or “Sanctified”. In this form it can be applied to a “Holy” person, a place (άγιον όρος; - The Holy Mountain), a thing, such as Scripture itself (αγιογράφικα - Holy Writing), or even God (άγιον πνεύμα; - The Holy Spirit). But very soon the early Christians began to using the term “Saint” more narrowly to refer to a specific, exemplary individual. (For a lexical explanation, see Liddel & Scott. [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%23525]) The earliest known occurrence of άγιος as "Saint" seems to be in The Shepherd of Hermas, chapter 5 (or 13, depending on how chapters are counted), verse 2. "The Shepherd" was authored at about the same time as 2 Peter.

Short form

Abbreviation for the term Saint is usually “St.” or “St”; in cases where multiple Saints are referenced SS. is the norm.

Historicity

Some theologians believe that many people venerated as Saints never actually existed. The polite term for such "Saints" is ahistorical. Sorting out exactly which Saints are ahistorical is difficult, because of the larger difficulty of proving a negative: the absence of independent records of a Saint's existence doesn't prove she or he never existed; indeed there are no specific records of the existence of many people who lived before the 20th century. The Acta Sanctorum (hagiographical work) of the Bollandists forms a major part of the historiography of named Saints. There are a large number of Christian saints with what appear to be pagan names. Most likely they were pagans who converted to Christianity and subsequently became Saints. However, it is possible that some pre-Christian deities (especially in Rome's area) were accidentally adopted as saints. It is thought that some cults were “Christianized” in a fairly direct manner. The basis for this is usually a similarity of names. For example, it is now commonly asserted that Saint Brigid was based on the Celtic goddess Brigid. The goddess was popular long before Christianity reached Ireland. Another possibility is the melding of the actual life of the Saint with myths related to pre-Christian gods and heroes (see Comparative religion). There are some striking parallels to the events portrayed in the lives of certain saints and fables such as Androcles and the Lion.

Definition specific to religion

Christianity

Roman Catholicism

In the Roman Catholic church, the title of Saint - with a capital 'S' - refers to a person who has been formally canonized (officially recognized) by the Church. Formal Canonization is a lengthy process often taking many years, even centuries. The process includes a thorough investigation of the individual who has been put forth as a candidate for Sainthood. This investigation typically is concerned with examining and confirming (or disproving) any number of visions or miracles that may have been attributed to the person in question, or of the general holiness or specific good deeds that he or she may have done while alive. It should be noted, however, that the Church places special weight on those miracles or instances of intercession that happened after the individual died and which are seen to be demonstrative of the Saint's continued special relationship with God after death. Also, by this definition there are many people in heaven who have not been formally declared as Saints (most typically due to their obscurity and the involved process of formal canonization) but who may nevertheless generically be referred to as saints (lowercase 's'). While it can at times seem so, Saints are not worshiped — this would violate the Ten Commandments — but are asked for their help or their own prayer for a person. Some Saints intercede for specific problems: a "patron saint". Once a person has been declared a Saint, the body of the Saint is considered holy. In past centuries, the remains of Saints were distributed as holy artifacts. In modern times, however, there is a growing trend to respect the body of a Saint, leaving it alone and buried.

Eastern Orthodoxy

In the Eastern Orthodox Church a Saint is defined as anyone who is currently in Heaven, whether recognized here on earth, or not. By this definition, Adam and Eve, Moses, the various Prophets, the Angels and Archangels are all given the title of "Saint". Saints are not given the title by men, but by God The Orthodox believe that God reveals his Saints to us, often by answered prayers and other miracles. For the Orthodox, the formal recognition of a Saint often happens many years after they have been recognized by a localized community. There are numerous small local followings of countless saints that have not yet been recognized by the entire Orthodox church. After a careful process of deliberation by a synod of Bishops, there is a formal service of Glorification in which a Saint is recognized by the entire church. Such was the case with the sainthood of Tsar Nicholas II of Russia and his family. At first the members of the Royal family were recognized as martyrs by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in 1981, after which many believers in Russia began to pray to the Tsar and his family. Miracles were reported, including one miraculous icon which prompted an immediate local glorification. In 2000, the Tsar and his family were officially Glorified by the Russian Orthodox Church. A strong proponent of a saint's canonization can be a miraculous condition of their relics (although it is not in itself alone considered sufficient). In Orthodox countries it is often the custom to re-use graves after 3 to 5 years because of the limited space. Bones are respectfully washed and placed in an ossuary, often with the person's name written on the skull. Occasionally when a body is exhumed something miraculous occurs to reveal the person's Sainthood. There have been numerous occurrences where the exhumed bones suddenly give off a wonderful fragrance, like flowers; or sometimes the body is incorrupted, just as it was on the day the person died, despite having not been embalmed (traditionally the Orthodox do not embalm the dead) and having been buried for 3 years. The reason relics are considered sacred is because, for the Orthodox, the separation of body and soul is unnatural. Body and soul both comprise the person, and in the end, body and soul will be reunited; therefore, the body of a saint shares in the “Holiness” of the soul of the saint. Because the Church shows no true distinction between the living and the dead (the Saints are alive in Heaven), the Orthodox treat the saints as if they were still here. They venerate them and ask for their prayers, and consider them brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus. Saints are venerated and loved and asked to intercede for our salvation, but it should be clearly understood that they are not Worshiped; their holiness is from God who alone is worthy of Adoration. As Christ says in the Gospels, "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (Matt 4:10). The relics of Saints are highly respected, even more so than the Roman Catholics. As a general rule only clergy will touch relics in order to move them or carry them in procession, however, in veneration the faithful will kiss the relic to show love and respect toward the saint. Every altar in every Orthodox church contains relics, usually of martyrs. The Church building interiors are covered with the Icons of saints. In the Orthodox Church, baptism is the moment one is born again into Christ. The person entering the baptismal font is not the same person that emerges. It is for this reason that the person is given a new name; always the name of a saint. What is proper is that the person no longer goes by his old name because that person is dead, but uses the new name exclusively. It is also common that instead of birthdays, the person celebrates his Saints Day, the day on the Calendar of Saints ascribed to that particular saint. In Orthodox tradition some saints are known by the title Equal-to-apostles in recognition of their role in evangelising countries.

Protestantism

In many Protestant churches, the word is used more generally to refer to anyone who is a Christian. This is similar in usage to St. Paul's numerous references. In this sense, anyone who is within the Body of Christ is “Holy” because of their relationship with Jesus. However, high-church Anglicans and Episcopalians use the term "saint" similarly to the manner in which Catholics use it.

Latter-day Saints

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints follow the Protestant tradition described above, referring to themselves as "Latter-day Saints", or simply "Saints". This is usually preferred over the nickname "Mormons".

Islam

Islam has, traditionally, had a central place for saints within its cosmology and saints [Arabic: awliya--literally, Friends of Allah (singular: wali)] are mentioned in verses of the Qur'an. Although there is no formal canonization process in Islam, there do exist traditions of the Prophet (hadith) and sayings of the scholars of Islam about what the qualities of a true saint are. These include soundness of faith (aqidah), a strict adherence to the Prophetic traditions (sunnah) and Shar'iah Law, an upright moral character, the performance of charismatic marvels (Ar.: karamat) and, crucially, the acknowledgment by consensus of the orthodox that such and such a person is a saint. i.e. if the Muslim masses consider someone a Saint, he or she is one. Theoretically too a saint is said to have the ability to perform any miracle which the Prophet performed and there is also a spiritual hierarchy of saints in Islam with the Qutb or Ghawth (Pole or Succour) at the apex. This hierrarchy is detailed in the work of the great Andalusian Sufi Muhyuddin Ibn al-Arabi, who is considered one of the great Saints of Islam, as well as many others. Indeed, amongst orthodox, traditional, Muslims, those referred to as [Sufis] by Orientalist scholars of Islam are considered Saints and the two terms are virtually synonyms. Traditionally, the veneration of saints and tombs or shrines in Islam is very widespread and includes all geographical areas of the Muslim world, including the conservative Arabian peninsula. Saints are believed to have a power of intercession with God (Allah), and thus the ability to perform miracles and to give power or blessings known as baraka. In most Muslim countries there are religious festivities associated with saints, such as Urs festivals in India and Pakistan or the annual Mawlid in Egypt. A great Urs is yearly held in the valley of MohraSharif where great saints still live. On these days, the local saint(s) is/are venerated, and blessings are expected. Believers are nevertheless careful to distinguish between the blessings of the prophets (particularly Moses, Jesus and Muhammad) and those of the saints. Saints are an important component of popular Islam and are associated with Sufism, which includes many of the mystical branches of Islam. Sufism has several orders with precepts (tarika) for students (murid) who seek to follow the teachings of a saint. Although saints are acknowledged by many sufis, Sufism distances itself from the more animistic and cultic aspects of the veneration of saints, which includes, as in popular Christianity, all types of religious paraphernalia and popular rituals.

Judaism

The closest notion in Judaism is the tzadik, a righteous person. The Talmud says that at any time at least 36 tzaddikim are living among us: they are anonymous, but it is for their sake that the world is not destroyed. The Talmud and the Kabbalah offer various ideas about the nature and role of these 36 tzaddikim. The term can also be used generically to mean any righteous or saintly person.

Hinduism

Saints are also recognized in Hinduism. However, unlike the Roman Catholic or Orthodox Church, no formal process is required to acknowledge a person as a saint.
- Jagadguru Kripaluji Maharaj, the founder of the Jagadguru Kripalu Parishat, an organization which propagates Raganuga Bhakti, a form of selfless devotional practise and loving service to Radha Rani and Lord Krishna
- Raghavendra Swami, one of the most famous Hindu saints was believed to have performed miracles during his lifetime and continues to bless his devotees. He espoused Vaishnavism monotheism (worship of Vishnu as Supreme God) and Dvaita philosophy.
- Shri Ramakrishna
- Swami Ramana Maharshi
- Shirdi Sai Baba (c. 1838 - October 15, 1918) was an Indian fakir/guru who is regarded by his Hindu and Muslim followers as a saint.
- Tukaram was a great saint who was believed to have performed miracles and was a devotee of Krishna.
- Sant Shiri Nunuram Sahib(1898 - 1973) , A great Saint Whose Aashram is situated in Islamkot city of Sindh Province in Pakistan. See also sant and Hindu Gurus and Saints

Buddhism

The Dhamma or path of purification as outlined by the Buddha leads the disciple eventually to the status of an ariya, a noble-hearted person, of which there are four levels of increasing sanctity and holiness. These are, sotapanna or ‘stream-winner’; sakadagami or ‘once-returner’; anagami or ‘non-returner’; and finally arahant or ‘Holy One’ – a human being who is free from all defilements. Arahant is synonymous with Buddha, a fully enlightened human being, and is frequently used as an epithet of the Buddha Gotama in the liturgy of Southern Buddhism. An arahant may be considered as both a saint and a gnani or Gnostic; somebody who possesses transcendental spiritual knowledge.

Other religions

In many of the more obscure religions of the world, a saint is a man or a woman who has a direct personal link or connection with God and who can put a person on the way back to God. Many gurus overtly or covertly claim to be saints, which followers may believe to be true, even if the objective evidence doesn't match a formal definition of a saint. In the modern religion of Discordianism, sainthood is given very easily. As one of the founders, Kerry Thornley, once said, "To be a saint you don't need to do anything special, you just need to suffer a lot". Discordians don't really agree on who (or what) are saints, but fictional characters are considered "saintlier" than real people, and insanity always helps. Yossarian from Joseph Heller's Catch-22, Don Quixote, and Bokonon from Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle all appear on the Principia Discordia's list of saintly folk.

Santeria - Voodoo

The veneration of Catholic saints forms the basis of the Cuban Santería religion. In Santería, saints are syncretised with Yoruban deities, and are equally worshipped in churches (where they appear as saints) and in Santería religious festivities, where they appear as deities (orishas); however, this practice is condemned by the Roman Catholic Church. Santeria, Haitian Vodoun, Brazilian Umbanda and other similar religions adopted the Roman Catholic Saints, or the images of the saints, as representations of their own spirits/deities or 'Orishas' in Santeria and 'Lwa' in Vodoun. Although there are many similarities between Vodoun and Santeria, they are different in respect to origin and language (Vodou is French, Santeria is Spanish). The adoption of Catholic Saints was fairly common in the religions that were adapted by the slaves in the New World. It can be understood as a more recent example of the absorption of pre-Christian elements into European "Catholicism" — although with Santeria and Vodoun the native religion seems to be more dominant. Different regions of the world where Catholicism is practiced have varying ways of practicing their faith. The Catholic Church has not always condemned the practices of these "religions" or sub-sects (although there were brief local movements against Vodoun by the Church in Haiti). Perhaps the adoption of the Catholic saints is more of a testament to the durability and adaptability of religions like Vodoun. It is remarkable that Vodoun practitioners can consider themselves Catholic and Vodounists at the same time. Perhaps it is more realistic to say that elements of Catholicism were adapted into Vodoun and Santeria.

Eastern orthodoxy

, one of the most venerated of Orthodox Christian icons of Mary.]] The Eastern Orthodox Church (encompassing national Orthodox jurisdictions such as Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, etc.—see Eastern Orthodox Church organization) is a body of Christians which claims origins extending directly back to Jesus and his Apostles through unbroken Apostolic Succession. Its doctrines were formalized through a series of church councils, the most authoritative being the Seven Ecumenical Councils held between the 4th and 8th centuries. These councils were convened out of the necessity to resolve conflicts that had developed concerning beliefs such as Arianism, Nestorianism, and Monothelitism. Toward the end of its first thousand years of existence differences developed between the Eastern and Western Roman Empire that ultimately led to the Great Schism in 1054, splitting Roman Catholics from the Eastern Orthodox. The present-day influence of the Orthodox Church encompasses the territories associated with the former Byzantine and Russian empires: Eastern Europe, Asia (Russia/Siberia), and parts of the Middle East and Africa. Today, although Orthodoxy's strongest influence can be seen in Greece, Russia, Serbia and Montenegro, Romania, Bulgaria, Republic of Macedonia and Georgia, the Orthodox Church has a presence in a great many other countries, with large communities in the USA and Australia.

Beliefs

The Trinity

Orthodox Christians believe in a single God who is both three and one—Triune—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, "one in essence and undivided." The Holy Trinity is three "unconfused" distinct divine persons (hypostases), with no overlap or modality among them, who share one divine essence (ousia)—uncreated, immaterial and eternal. In discussing God's relationship to his creation a distinction is made between God's eternal essence and uncreated energies, though it is understood that this distinction is artificial and that there is no real separation in God. Energies and essence are both inseparably God. This distinction is used by theologians to explain how it is that God can be both transcendent (His "essence" lies outside and infinitely distant from his creation), while at the same time he can touch his creation (His "uncreated energies" interact with His creation). It is also in His energies that we can perceive the three distinct persons of the Trinity. The Father is the eternal source of the Godhead, from Whom the Son is begotten eternally and also from Whom the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally. Orthodox doctrine regarding the Holy Trinity is summarized in the Symbol of Faith (Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed).

Salvation

Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed Man, in Orthodox belief, was originally created perfect, but through his own actions he embraced evil through disobedience to God. Because of Man's fall he was condemned, when he died, to go to Hell (Hades); it is believed that from Adam to St. John the Baptist, all men went to a place of separation from God. But when Jesus came into the world he himself was Perfect Man and Perfect God united. Through his participation in humanity, human nature was changed allowing human beings to participate in the divine nature. This process of changing human nature worked retroactive back to the beginning of time, saving all of those who came before, back to Adam. Salvation, or "being saved," therefore, refers to this process of being saved from the fate of separation from God. It is a distinct concept separate from the concept of "going to heaven." The Orthodox have always maintained that salvation belongs to all mankind and membership in the Orthodox Church is not required, however, it also maintains that the best and most complete path to participation in the gifts of God are spelled out by the Orthodox Church alone. The Orthodox believe that there is nothing that a person can do to earn entrance into Heaven. It is rather a gift from God, who wants nothing more than to restore the original relationship with mankind. However, such a gift has to be desired by the believer, God does not force Heaven on humanity. Man is free to reject it when offered by God. The ultimate goal of the Orthodox Christian is to achieve theosis, or Union with God. This is sometimes expressed thus: "God became Man so that Man might become God." This process is a "Goal" that is seldom reached by humans, but some have done it. Some of the greatest saints have achieved, in this life, a measure of the next. Of course, the individual who achieves theosis never realizes his accomplishment, as his perfect humility keeps him blind to pride.

Tradition

In contrast to Protestantism, which generally relies upon the Bible as the sole, ultimate doctrinal authority (sola scriptura), and similarly to Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy relies upon Tradition, a broad term encompassing the Bible, the Creed, the decrees of the Seven Ecumenical Councils; the writings of those considered the "Church Fathers", as well as Orthodox laws (canons), liturgical books and icons, etc. In reliance upon tradition, Orthodox point to Paul: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by our spoken word, or by our epistle." (2 Thessalonians 2:15). The Orthodox Church believes that the Holy Spirit works through history to reveal truth to the members of the Church, and that He weeds out falsehood in order that the Truth may grow.

The Bible

The Bible in Orthodoxy is not always interpreted literally. In Orthodoxy, the true believer accepts what is written in The Bible, and never doubts it, but the actual attitude of Eastern Orthodox toward science varies, with conservative believers opposed to some concepts of evolution in the origins and development of life. Orthodoxy considers truth to be seen in the "Consensus of the Fathers", a perceived thread of agreement running through the patristic writings to the early Church and the Apostles. Those who disagreed with what came to be considered the consensus were not accepted as authentic "Fathers." All theological concepts must be in agreement with that consensus. Even those considered to be authentic "Fathers" may have some theological opinions that are not universally shared, but are not actually heretical. Thus an Orthodox Christian is not bound to agree with every opinion of every Father, but rather with the overall consensus of the Fathers, and then only on those matters about which the church is dogmatic. 2 Thessalonians Eastern Orthodox theologians tended to rely more on Greek philosophers than did the West, often borrowing the categories and vocabulary of Neoplatonism to explain Christian doctrine, though not necessarily accepting all their theories. Some later non-Christian neoplatonist philosophers also borrowed some vocabulary from Christian theologians.

Sin and redemption

Generally speaking, the Orthodox tradition is uncomfortable with any practice which interprets doctrine in "legalistic" terms. Following rules strictly without the heart "being in it" does not help a believer with his salvation. Sin is not about breaking some set of rules; rather, it is the name for any behavior which "misses the mark," that is, moves a believer away from God rather than closer to Him. Thus, in the Orthodox tradition sin is not viewed as a stain on the soul that needs to be wiped out, but rather as an illness that needs healing. Just like a bodily illness, human sinfullness needs individual attention and correction. The ultimate goal for this process is not to win back God's favor, but rather to get back on the path towards God. The traditional practice of the Orthodox is to have a spiritual father (or mother) to whom one confesses and who treats the sin on an individual basis. An experienced spiritual father will know how and when to apply strictness in dealing with sin and when to administer mercy.

The Incarnation

Prior to Christ's incarnation on Earth it was man's "fate", when he died, because of the fall of Adam, to be separated from God. Because man introduced something alien to his nature by participation in evil through disobedience to God, mankind placed itself in a terrible and inescapable position. The answer to this problem was for God to raise man's fallen nature, to unite his divine nature with our human nature. This he accomplished through the incarnation, becoming man and yet remaining God. This is why Christ Jesus is referred to as the Logos, the solution to man's problem (one of the several meanings of Logos). It is absolutely fundamental that we accept Christ as both God and Man, both natures complete. This is the only means whereby we could escape the fate of hell. The incarnation changes mankind itself, uniting it to the divine. And now, because of that Incarnation, everything is different: St Basil states: "We are to strive to become little gods, within God, little jesus christs within Jesus Christ". In other words, we must seek perfection in all things in our lives; we must strive to acquire Godly virtue. God through participation in mankind makes it possible for man to participate in divinity. While it is true that we will not become "separate" gods in the pagan sense we will participate in the divine energies of God (which are not separate from God) and still retain our individuality.

The Theotokos

A great many traditions revolve around the Ever-Virgin Mary, The Theotokos, the Birth-giver of God, that are theologically paramount. That she was and remained a Virgin before and after Christ's birth; that in being born, Christ miraculously did no physical harm to her, leaving her virginity intact; That she felt no pain in child birth. Much of the churches beliefs concerning the Virgin Mary are reflected in the apocryphal text, "The Nativity of Mary" which was not included in scripture, but is considered to be accurate in its description of events. The child Mary was consecrated at the age of three to serve in the temple as a temple virgin. Zachariah, then High Priest, did the unthinkable and carried Mary into the Holy of Holies as a sign of her importance – that she herself would become the ark in which God would take form. At the age of twelve she was required to give up her position and marry, but she desired to remain forever a virgin in dedication to God. And so it was decided to marry her to a close relative, Joseph, an uncle or cousin, an older man, a widower, who would care for her and allow her to retain her virginity. And so it was that when the time came she submitted to God’s will and allowed the Christ to take form within her. It is believed that she, in her life, committed no sin; however, the Orthodox do not accept the concept of immaculate conception. The Theotokos was subject to original sin as the Orthodox understand it, but was cleansed of this sin the moment Christ was conceived within her. In the Theology of the Orthodox Church it is most important to understand that Christ, from the moment of conception was 100% God and 100% man. Therefore it is correct to say that Mary is indeed, the Theotokos, the Birth-giver of God, and that she is the greatest of all humans ever to have lived. This term has tremendous theological significance to Orthodox Christians, as it was at the center of the so-called Christological debates of the 4th and 5th centuries AD. After her great role was accomplished, the Church believes she remained a virgin, continuing to serve God in all ways. She traveled much with her Son, and was present both at his Passion on the Cross and at his ascension into heaven. It is believed that she was the first to know of her son's resurrection – the Archangel Gabriel appearing to her once more and revealing it to her. It is believed she lived to the age of seventy and called all the apostles to her before she died. According to tradition St Thomas arrived late and was not present at her death. Desiring to kiss her hand one last time he opened her tomb but her body was gone. The Orthodox believe she was assumed into heaven bodily, however, unlike in the Roman Catholic Church, it is not a dogmatic prescription and so is usually referred to as the Dormition of the Virgin, not the Assumption.

Understanding the term mystery

Orthodox beliefs, in general, have a consistency that holds together very well when logical analysis is applied. In fact, a lack of logical sense may be a justifiable reason for rejecting a belief. Such rejected beliefs are called heresy. Orthodox theology is extensive and rich with logical justification based on "the consensus of the Fathers" as described above, however, there are certain places that the Orthodox refuse to delve into simply because they believe that such attempts at understanding are fruitless and in fact often lead to misunderstanding and heresy. Such areas of theology are referred to as "mysteries". Mysteries are not "cop-outs". An example of a cop-out might be an answer such as "God can do whatever he wants to do" in answer to a valid theological question. A mystery, on the other hand usually presents itself when two highly logical points cannot be resolved with one another, yet both points must be true. An good example of this is as follows: Christ is 100% man and 100% God. He is 100% present as Jesus Christ, yet he must also be 100% omnipresent at the same time. The Virgin Mary gave birth to God incarnate and is therefore the Mother of God, yet God who is infinite and timeless had no progenetor. In order to logically explain our salvation all of these things must be accepted as absolutely true, yet none of them can be explained. Any attempt at explanation leads to one of the many heresies condemned by the church. Examples: Christ was born human then made God after his death or Christ was God and only pretended to be man or the Virgin Mary gave birth to only the human Jesus (in all these cases human nature is not changed and our salvation is not accomplished). Of course the cop-out that follows such attempts is always, "God can do whatever he wants to do". This has never been acceptable to Orthodox Christians who understand that certain things cannot be explained yet must be true; such are mysteries.

The Resurrection

The Resurrection of Christ is the absolute central event of the Orthodox Church and is understood in absolutely literal terms. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was crucified and died, descended into Hades, battled Death and won. Through these events, He released mankind from the bonds of Hell and then came back to the living as a man and God. That each individual human may partake of this immortality, which would have been impossible without the Resurrection, is the main promise held out by God in his New Covenant with mankind, according to Orthodox Christian tradition. In one way or another, every holiday of the Orthodox ecclesiastical year relates to the Resurrection directly or indirectly. Every Sunday of the year is dedicated to celebrating the Resurrection; most Orthodox believers will refrain from kneeling or prostrations on Sundays in observance thereof. The Orthodox tradition puts very little liturgical emphasis on the passion of Christ during the days leading up to the Crucifixion, and instead sees it as necessary stepping-stones to the ultimate victory only days later. However, the passion is seen as a model for the ascetic self-denial that the Orthodox believer is called to live out in his quest for God.

Saints, relics, and the deceased

In the Eastern Orthodox Church a saint is defined as anyone who is currently in Heaven, whether recognized here on earth or not. By this definition, Adam and Eve, Moses, the various Prophets, Martyrs for the Faith, the Angels and Archangels are all given the title of Saint. There is a formal service in the Orthodox Church whereby a saint is recognized by the entire church called "glorification". This does not, however, "make" a saint but simply accords him or her a place on the calendar with regular services in his honor. Recently, in order to avoid abuses, the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople has begun to follow the longstanding practice of other local Churches by issuing special encyclical letters (tomoi) in which the Church acknowledges the popular veneration of a saint. Glorification usually happens after believers have already begun venerating a saint. There are numerous small local followings of countless saints that have not yet been recognized by the entire Orthodox Church. A strong element in favor of glorification can be the perceived "miraculous" condition of physical remains (relics), although that alone is not considered sufficient. In some Orthodox countries it is the custom to re-use graves after three to five years due to limited space. Bones are respectfully washed and placed in an ossuary, often with the person's name written on the skull. Occasionally when a body is exhumed something believed to be miraculous occurs to reveal the person's sainthood. There have been numerous occurrences where the exhumed bones are said to suddenly give off a wonderful fragrance, like flowers; or sometimes the body is said to be found incorrupt despite having not been embalmed (traditionally the Orthodox do not embalm the dead) and having been buried for three years. For the Orthodox, body and soul both comprise the person, and in the end, body and soul will be reunited; therefore, the body of a saint shares in the holiness of the soul of the saint. Because the Orthodox Church shows no true distinction between the living and the dead (believing the saints are alive in Heaven), the Orthodox treat the saints as if they were still here. They venerate them and ask for their prayers, and consider them brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus. Saints are venerated and loved and asked to intercede for salvation, but they are not given the worship accorded to God, because their holiness is believed to come from God. In fact, any who worship, as opposed to venerate, a saint, relics, or icons is to be excommunicated. As a general rule only clergy will touch relics in order to move them or carry them in procession, however, in veneration the faithful will kiss the relic to show love and respect toward the saint. Every altar in every Orthodox church contains relics, usually of martyrs. The Church building interiors are covered with the icons of saints. The Orthodox Church practices baptism for infants and adults as the moment one is born into Christ. The person entering the baptismal font is not seen as the same person who emerges, so the person is given a new name, used exclusively and always the name of a saint. As well as birthdays, Orthodox celebrate the day of the saint for whom the person is named (the person's namesday).

The Last Things

Heaven, to Eastern Orthodox, is not a static state. They believe mankind will be restored to perfection, but perfection not as an ultimate end in and of itself; adverse traits will be gone from the human race and man will be as originally intended. Since God's love and wisdom are infinite, the constant progression toward a deeper understanding of that love and wisdom is equated with heavenly bliss. They also believe that for those who reject the love and mercy of God, the experience of His presence will be unbearably painful - hence the notion of hell.

Art and Architecture

Church buildings

iconsThe church building has many symbolic meanings. Perhaps the oldest and most prominent is the concept that the Church is the Ark (as in Noah’s) in which the world is saved from the flood of temptations. And so, most Orthodox Churches are rectangular in design. Another popular shape, especially for churches with large choirs is the Cross. Architectural patterns may vary in shape and complexity, with chapels sometimes added around the main church, or triple altars, but in general, the symbolic layout of the church remains the same. The Church building is divided into three main parts: the Narthex (entrance hall), the Nave and the Altar. Narthex: The Narthex is the connection between the Church and the outside world and for this reason catechumens (pre-baptized Orthodox) and Non-Orthodox stand here (note: the tradition of only allowing confirmed orthodox into the Nave of the church has for the most part fallen into disuse). In monastic churches it is usual for the lay people visiting the monastery to stand in the narthex while the monks or nuns stand in the nave. Separating the narthex from the nave are the "Royal Doors" (from the time of the Byzantine Empire, when the Emperor would enter the main body of Agia Sophia, the Church of holy Wisdom, through these doors and proceed up to the altar to partake of the Eucharist). On either side of this portal are large brass candlestands called menalia which represent the pillars of fire which went before the hebrews into the promised land. Nave: The Nave is the main body of the Church where the people stand during the services. In most Orthodox Churches there are no pews but rather stacidia (like a high chair with foldup seat - it has arm rests high enough to be used while standing - see the picture of the monks); these were usually found along the walls, to be used only by the aged and infirm. Traditionally there is no sitting during services with the only exceptions being during the reading of the Psalms, and the priest's sermon. The people stand before God. However because of the influence of Roman Catholic and Protestant practices in western countries it is not uncommon to find pews and kneelers in more modern church structures. icons The walls are normally covered from floor to ceiling with icons or wall paintings of saints, their lives, and stories from the Bible. Because the Church is a direct evolution of its jewish roots where men and women stand separately; The Orthodox Church continues this practice of de-emphasizing the "family" with men standing on the right and women on the left. Because of this arrangement it is emphasized that we are all equal before God (Equal distance from the a