Talk:Columbanus/Archive 1

2006–2016

NPOV

The article in En. Catholica is quite comperhansive but rather NPOV (obviously) and the article should be cleaned-up to remove statements such as "Columbanus, by his holiness, zeal, and learning, was eminently fitted for the work that lay before him."

Ori Redler 16:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Columban name

Name more likely means "Little Columba/Dove" than "Fair". Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 03:18, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you get 'little'. I would have thought it more likely to mean mean 'white', as the Irish word for white is bán, and the Latin banus.

But I do think the existing article is way off beam when it says "...his Irish name 'Colum Ban', which means "the fair Colum". His name is not, therefore, an anglicization." I stand open to correction, but I'd assume that the common Irish name Colm is derived from the saints' name rather than vice versa. My impression is that Colm/Columba/Colman was an epithet for a missionary monk, derived from the dove that brought back news of dry land in the Biblical Noah's Ark story. In the dark period after the collapse of the Roman Empire, this image of a messenger of hope would have been a powerful one to Christians. Therefore I think it most like that the name simply meant "white dove".

And while bán (white) can mean fair-as-in-blond in modern Irish, I have no idea if it would have meant fair-as-in-beautiful in Old Irish 1500 years ago. (Perhaps some deleted argument on that point explains why the name "is not, therefore, an anglicization", otherwise I've no idea why the issue of anglicization would even arise.) Sergeirichard (talk) 19:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Extensive clean-up needed

This article is chock full of anachronistic and POV statements, e.g. the statements about the supremecy of Rome, the theology of which was underdeveloped at the time (at best). I'm going to be bold and start on this in the next few days. Josh (talk) 17:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Too true. Most of this reads like a hagiography, or the textbooks we had in Catholic school in Ireland! It's... pleasant, but it's certainly not in the manner of an encyclopedia. Sergeirichard (talk) 19:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Potential source for inclusion

I was just pointed at [1] which could be a potential source for topics discussed in this article. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Plagiarism from Catholic Encyclopedia

Much of the section on Columbanus' monastic rule seems to have been lifted directly from the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on St. Columbanus:

Wikipedia entry: "The Monastic Rule of St. Columbanus is much shorter than that of St. Benedict, consisting of only ten chapters. The first six of these treat of obedience, silence, food, poverty, humility, and chastity. In these there is much in common with the Benedictine code, except that the fasting is more rigorous.

Chapter VII deals with the Choir Offices. Sunday Matins in winter consisted of seventy-five psalms and twenty-five antiphons-- three psalms to each antiphon. In spring and autumn these were reduced to thirty-six, and in summer to twenty-four, fewer were said on week days. The day hours consisted of Terce, Sext, None and Vespers. Three psalms were said at each of these Offices, except Vespers, when twelve psalms were said.

Chapter X regulates penances (often corporal) for offences, and it is here that the Rule of St. Columbanus differs so widely from that of St. Benedict. Stripes or fasts were enjoined for the smallest faults. The habit of the monks consisted of a tunic of undyed wool, over which was worn the cuculla, or cowl, of the same material. A great deal of time was devoted to various kinds of manual labour, not unlike the life in monasteries of other rules.

The Rule of St. Columbanus was approved of by the Council of Mâcon in 627, but it was destined before the close of the century to be superseded by that of St. Benedict. For several centuries in some of the greater monasteries the two rules were observed conjointly."

Catholic Encyclopedia [2]: "This Last is much shorter than that of St. Benedict, consisting of only ten chapters. The first six of these treat of obedience, silence, food, poverty, humility, and chastity. In these there is much in common with the Benedictine code, except that the fasting is more rigorous. Chapter vii deals with the choir Offices. Sunday Martins in winter consisted of sevent-five psalms and twenty-five antiphone--three psalms to each antiphone. In spring and autumn these were reduced to thirty-six, and in summer to twenty-four, Fewer were said on week days. The day hours consisted of Terce, Sext, None, and Vespers. Three psalms were said at each of these Offices, except Vespers, when twelve psalms were said. Chapter x regulates penances for offences, and it is here that the Rule of St. Columbanus differs so widely from that of St. Benedict. Stripes or fasts were enjoined for the smallest faults. The habit of the monks consisted of a tunic of undyed wool, over which was worn the cuculla, or cowl, of the same material. A great deal of time was devoted to various kinds of manual labour. The Rule of St. Columbanus was approved of by the Council of Mâcon in 627, but it was destined before the close of the century to be superseded by that of St. Benedict."

Ethanmandel (talk) 18:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

France?

The use of "France" and "French' in this article is anachronistic: it is usually regarded as more appropriate to use the term "Gaul" for this period. Diomedea Exulans (talk) 13:46, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for noting this. I've removed the anachronisms. Bede735 (talk) 15:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)