Hear hear!
~S~
who's listening?
--- Toby Bartels <toby+wikipedia(a)math.ucr.edu> wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Karl Eichwalder wrote:
>Starting an article as follows: "Saint
Bernard of
Clairvaux" will offend
>many a lot human beings who are not members of
the
Roman church.
I partially agree, and partially disagree.
"Saint
Bernard of Clairvaux"
is perfectly fine, as people who have been
beatified are often referred
to as such, both by those who recognize the
sainthood and those who do
not (there are plenty of atheists who debate the
viewpoints of Saint
Peter, for example).
I think that Saint Peter is different from Bernard
of Clairvaux.
As an atheist, I typically say, in ordinary
conversation,
"Saint Peter", "Saint Paul", and the like -- or
better yet,
"the Apostle Peter", "the Apostle Paul", and the
like.
The reason for this is disambiguation (in natural
speech);
in the context of discussing the Acts of the
Apostles,
that's not necessary, but in general it is, and I do
that.
But "Bernard of Clairvaux" needs no additional
title.
Similarly, I say "Mother Teresa" even though
"Mother" is a title
(and a violation of Matthew 23:9 in the opinion of
some Protestants),
because this title is what distinguishes her from
other "Teresa"s;
yet I would not add "Blessed" -- nor even "Saint" in
the future --
since this is not necessary.
In short, "Saint Bernard of Clairvaux" doesn't
offend me, an atheist;
yet I also find it unnecessary to use (unlike "Saint
Paul", which I do use).
-- Toby
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search