Talk:Philomena

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Saints Philomena is part of the WikiProject Saints, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christian liturgical calendars on Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to saints as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to saints. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Saints Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Photo request It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality.

Contents

[edit] Changes on Saturday, February 18, 2006.

Regarding the removal of the comment: “further analysis, what was thought to be blood contained in the glass vessel was proved to be only perfume”

The vial mentioned was translated with the rest of the relics from Rome to Mugnano del Cardinale Italy in 1805. It has been in the possession of the Sanctuary of Saint Philomena from that date. And no test, scientific or otherwise that has been performed on the vial to determine its contents has ever concluded that the contents were perfume. The published report on the St. Patrick website that it was determined that the content of the vial was perfume is not based in truth or fact.

That website, Saint Patrick Church, Washington D.C., also publishes other "facts" which are not based in truth or reality.

The statement they published, "According to this fraudulent vision, Philomena was the daughter of converted, barren Greek……”

It is troubling that a seemingly credible Catholic church would publish something contrary to what the Universal Church has given an opinion on. Namely that the story they refer to as “fraudulent” was given official approval by the chruch. The locutions (or rather story, as Saint Patrick’s prefers to call them) received approval by the Holy Office, (presently the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) on December 21, 1833.

Saint Patrick’s church further publishes additional incorrect information: “It was discovered that the phial was filled with perfume, not blood. The Benedictines of Ramsgate note that "further archeological investigation proved however that the disarrangement of stones was a regular habit of the sextons in the 4th century when they re-used materials already engraved, and intended to indicate that it was not the same person." Additionally, it was discovered that the bones were not that old; the bones originally entombed there may have been removed earlier. In 1961, her feast was abolished and her shrine dismantled.

As stated above, according to Monsignor Giovanni Braschi, the current Rector of the Sanctuary of Saint Philomena in Mugnano del Cardinale, after he reviewed the official record of the testing of the vial, “there has never been any such scientific or other examination of the blood that has ever stated the opinion that the contents is believed or proven to be perfume. Any publishing of that statement is pure fantasy in the mind of the author.”

Additionally, Monsignor Braschi reports that, “the statement saying that the Benedictines of Ramsgate note regarding scientific examination is also complete fantasy on the author’s part. The author may be referring to published reports based on the opinion of noted archaeologist Horacia Marucci in the early twentieth century, who published a similar opinion. That is, his opinion was that the three tiles were removed from another grave site and placed on to the one attributed to Saint Philomena. However, two facts that rarely accompany Marucci’s published opinion and those are that he was reputed by most of his contemporaries as being incorrect and that fact that Marucci had never visited the Sanctuary of Saint Philomena to inspect the actual tiles nor did he visit the site of the loculus in the catacombs of Pricilla. The Saint Patrick report goes on to state that the feast was abolished and her shrine dismantled. This is the most outrageous of all the fantasies because the Sanctuary of Saint Philomena has operated under the full authority of the church as the Sanctuary for more than two hundred years.”

Additionally, and this is my opinion, not Monsignor Braschi, one wonders what would motivate a Church in the United States to publish such outrageous and easily disproved information.

To quote Dr. Mark I. Miravalle, professor of theology, Franciscan University, Steubenville, Ohio, author of the Present Ecclesial Status of Devotion to St. Philomena:

(Why was St. Philomena removed from the calendar? Ironically, the reason given was the supposed lack of historical evidence for the existence of Philomena, despite numerous documented miracles and the support of popes and saints. This argument against Philomena rested principally on the questionable conclusions of one early twentieth century archeologist, Oracio Marucchi. In 1903, he posited that the apparent mis-ordering of the 3 tiles on the grave alleged to be Philomena’s—starting with “Lumena” on first tile, instead of “Paxte”—proved that the tiles had come from another, earlier, grave and had been re-used in hers. Therefore, he argued, the grave and remains discovered in 1802 were not that of “Filumena” but of another, unknown person.
Marucchi’s claims have been comprehensively countered and overturned by many renowned European historians and archeologists. The Jesuit archeologist Guiseppe Bonavenia was one of the first to respond to Marucchi. In 1907 he reminded the archaeological world that it was a frequent custom in the catacombs to begin epigraphs on the second tile, beginning with “Peace to you.” Hence, when the Vatican’s official Custodian of Holy Relics, Msgr. Ponzetti, read the inscription beginning from the second tile as “PAX TECUM FILUMENA,” he read it correctly.
It was also very possible that the original maker of the tomb, finding himself unable to write the entire name of “Filumena” on the first tile, wrote the “FI” on the last tile and “LUMENA” on the first, allowing him to conserve artistic proportion. In any case, there were at least 12 graves in the Priscilla Catacombs that began with “PAX TECUM,” “PAX TIBI,” or “IN PACE.” Marucchi’s theory that the order of Philomena’s tiles argued against the grave being hers was shown to be groundless. Furthermore, the tiles used on Philomena’s grave date at least from the third century, precluding them from being those of an earlier second-century grave, as Marucchi alleged. The early Christians did not re-use brick tiles, only marble, because marble was very expensive and brick was not, and those of Philomena’s are of brick.
Two more contemporary archeologists, Prandi and Mustillo, after examining the actual tiles in 1963 also stated that the stance of Marucchi had no foundation. The evidence rested not only on tile position but on tile condition. The two archeologists pointed out that had the tiles been removed from another grave in order to be re-used for Philomena’s, damage would have been done to the outer edges of the tile where previously cemented. However, no damage was found on the tiles from St. Philomena’s loculus: “During the process of going from first to second usage, chips would have very likely been made to the edges of the brick tiles… [These tiles of Philomena] still have sound and undamaged matching edges along the line of fracture.”
Marucchi had never examined the gravesite nor the tiles themselves, but rather had made an abstract hypothesis without the necessary archeological investigation. Contemporary Austrian historian, George Markhof, strongly criticized Marucchi’s conclusions: “I hold the judgment of the Italian archeologist Marucchi to be superficial… something extremely surprising considering the excellent renown he enjoyed. Evidently he was prejudiced against Saint Philomena, and not disposed, as is suitable for a scientist, to investigate the merits of this affair in an objective manner.” )


[edit] Changes

I see from your reaction to my email to you and the change of the web page after I changed it that you are not open to discussion about the truth of St Philomena. I also notice you did not display my comments on the discussion board.I also have just discovered that the one changing it to day is a fellow collegue of mine from the Sanctuary of St Philomena. Can you please tell me why you do not want to display the truth about St Philomena on this web page?

Moved signature from initial article (Graham Pope BA Theology BTh (Hons)) here. You will find, Graham, that we generally don't sign articles, as they quickly move from one person's work to the work of many -- hopefully in an incrementally improving way. It will also be easier to have discussions with other users here if you set up a user name -- Someone else 09:28 Dec 31, 2002 (UTC)

There are some unclear points in the article:

"Her relationship with the Curé of Ars, through whom she is said to have performed miracles, is historically well-documented."

Is not the Curé of Ars a present-day priest? What "relationship" does/did he have with Philomena? Is it Roman-Catholic teaching that saints perform miracles? Are miracles not rather ascribed to the intercession of saints? Precisely what is historically well-documented?

S.

Posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007
Since no one responded to you last year when you first posed your question, please let me answer your questions.
1 – Saint John Vianney, most commonly know as the Curé d'Ars, was born in 1786 and died in 1859, so, no; he is not a contemporary priest.
2 – His “relationship” with Saint Philomena has been well documented as well as the many miracles attributed to his intercession (which he always attributed to Saint Philomena) in many books that have been written about him.
3 – Yes, you are absolutely correct; miracles are attributed by the intercession of saints.
4 – What she meant when the poster you were responding to is that the miracles attributed to both Saint John Vianney and Saint Philomena have been well documented.

"There are ongoing attempts to rehabilitate St. Philomena's position within the Catholic Church"

Only St. Catherine of Alexandria is as edifyingly fictional. The Roman Catholic Church has for more than a century now tried to rid itself of these pious fictions. Fictional tales of fictional saints is one thing, but the veneration of fictional saints is something entirely different. --FourthAve 14:19, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

I've added the category for Christian mythology. As early as 1908 the Catholic Encyclopedia seemed to have been convinced that her life story was unknown, and that there was no particular proof of martyrdom or sanctity. I've added some quotes from there. Also, the Curé d'Ars is St Jean Vianney; mentioned his actual name, and the link. He played a big role in publicising the discovery of this fictional saint. It is interesting in that "St Philomena" sheds some light on the way legendary saints get invented, if only because it all happened in a time of widespread literacy, newspaper coverage, and within preserved records. Smerdis of Tlön 20:04, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Upon re-reading, I've decided to add the NPOV tag. The article gives no inkling that there unlikely was any such person as Saint Philomena, although statements like "(a)ll historical knowledge of St. Philomena's life has been revealed by divine revelation, there is no written record of her life or death, she was an unknown until her crypt in St. Priscilla was uncovered in 1802," and the fact that there apparently exists a movement to "rehabilitate" her, strongly suggests that this supposed saint is fictional. Smerdis of Tlön 11:39, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I have thoroughly rewritten the page to address the problem I perceived here. Smerdis of Tlön 14:29, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I am not sure why the word “rehabilitate” was chosen. I will tell you that there was an official, and still an ongoing unofficial, effort to petition the Congregation of Divine Worship to consider returning St. Philomena to the Universal Calendar.
Really there is nothing to “rehabilitate”. The devotion to Saint Philomena has been a part of the Catholic tradition for about two hundred years. Still, there are a number of churches around the world that still bear her name. A list can be seen at the website of the Sanctuary of Saint Philomena at: http://www.philomena.it
In reference to the Catholic Encyclopedia, yes, certainly it is clear they had serious question as to the authenticity of Saint Philomena, and many churches around the world changed their names from St. Philomena after the decision to remove her from the Universal Calendar.
As in all subjects of faith, it is up to an individual to choose to believe or not to believe. To make such flat statements as “proof” that something does not exist, especially an object of faith, based on published articles in even a well established institution such as the Catholic Encyclopedia or by the actions taken by the Congregation of Divine Worship, alone, is, well, it is irresponsible.
The amount of churches, schools and other institutions around the world that choose to reject the notion that Saint Philomena is not, as you say, fictional, has as much a right to be considered as your opinion.
As I have stated here before, there are publications, and indeed leaders around the world today, who state flatly that the German Holocaust never happened. That certainly does not mean that, it did not happen.

[edit] Contribution by User:Filumenae

[edit] Unfortunately, there is a lot of confusion about this Saint.

Padre Pio, who had a devotion to her, stated that he felt any confusion over her is the work of satan.

Several of the common miss-information about the Saint is that the Cultus was suppressed in 1961. This is not true.

The Vatican recognized Saint Philomena today as strongly as when she was first canonized. The Universal Archconfraternity of Saint Philomena is still recognized and promoted by the Vatican. She is still recognized as the Patron Saint of the Universal Living Rosary and the Propagation of the Faith. Both organizations are still strongly supported by the Vatican.

The truth is that she was removed from the liturgical calendar in 1961. She had never been placed on the calendar in the United States and there are no churches that have changed their name, anywhere in the world, because of her removal from the liturgical calendar in 1961.

Several churches that bore her name in the United States were torn down, but that was in the name of progress, not in reaction to her being removed from the liturgical calendar.

[edit] She was canonized by Pope Gregory XVI.

From the liturgical approval of Gregory XVI to the papal decrees of St. Pius X, Nineteen acts of the Holy See in the course of five successive pontificates were issued in positive promotion of popular devotion to St. Philomena expressed in the form of elevations in rank of liturgical cultus, the erection of confraternities and archconfraternities, and the granting of plenary and partial indulgences.

Several acts of the Holy See particularly display the Magisterium’s approval and encouragement of ecclesial devotion to this Christian saint and martyr. Beyond the elevation of the rank of the mass and office previously granted by Gregory XVI, Bl. Pius IX approved a proper mass and office dedicated to St. Philomena with the papal confirmation of the previously submitted decree, Etsi decimo on January 31, 1855, a significant liturgical elevation, even though her name was never entered into the Roman Martyrology. The granting of a proper mass and office to St. Philomena, which took place following the return of Bl. Pius IX from a papal pilgrimage to Mugnano during his forced exile from Rome, was an unprecedented act in honor of a Christian martyr known only by name and evidence of martyrdom. Bl. Pius IX also granted plenary and partial indulgences to devotions in honor of St. Philomena at the Sanctuary in Mugnano.

Pope Leo XIII granted papal approbation to the Cord of St. Philomena with several plenary indulgences in association with its wearing, and accorded the title and privilege of “archconfraternity” for the respective Philomenian devotion and work in France. Pope St. Pius X continued the papal succession of encouragement for public Church devotion by approving the extension of the Archconfraternity of St. Philomena to the universal Church.

Far more than one solitary papal act by Gregory XVI, the papal Magisterium has repeatedly encouraged the nature and growth of ecclesial devotion to St. Philomena, in official recognition of her status as a saint, in public liturgical and devotional sanctions which extended to the universal faith and life of the Church, and thereby manifesting official and essential liturgical and devotional characteristics of her status as a saint as defined by the Church.

[edit] The Great Devotees

Leo XII Declared Saint Philomena, The Great Thaumaturgist of the 18th century. Leo XII, over and over again, expressed the highest admiration for the extraordinary power confered by the Almighty on this hitherto unknown child Saint, and listened with delight to the accounts given him of the wonders she worked. So authentic did he account the information he received and so irrefutable the facts related to him that, notwithstanding the extreme care which the Church usually takes in such matters, he had no hesitation in allowing alters to be dedicated and chapels to be erected in her honor.

Gregory XVI. Named her Patroness of the Living Rosary and conceded to her the Universal cult.

Gregory XVI was himself a witness of the great miracle of Mugnano, the cure of Pauline Marie Jaricot. He visited her in Rome before her departure for Mugnano and verified for himself the desperate condition in which she lay.

On her return to Rome Miss Jaricot was received by the Sovereign Pontiff with the warmest affection. He did not conceal his amazement exclaiming: "Is this indeed, our daughter or is it a vision from the other world?"

Thought profoundly touched by what he himself declared to be a "miracle of the first class" he in nowise relaxed the rigorous laws of the Roman tribunals. On the contrary he commanded the Sacred Congregation of Rites to proceed at once to a thorough investigation of the cause. The difficulties that had arisen were carefully analyzed, the doubts that had been raised were sifted to the utmost. All the facts from the discovery of the relics in 1802 to the latest miracles worked by the Saint were subjected to the minutest scrutiny, and this by the most experienced and keenest experts in Rome. After a protracted examination the Sacred Congregation gave a full and favorable decision in favour of the cult of the Saint. Yet the Holy Father, notwithstanding his own personal love for St. Philomena, spent two more years in prayer and deliberation before making his final renouncement.

At last to the great delight of the Saint's devoted clients, among whom were numbered several distinguished Bishops, Archbishops and Cardinals, the Solemn Approval of the Church was made public. This was so complete and conferred so much glory on the Saint that it most amply compensated for the delay which had occurred.

The Pope was not content that Saint Philomena should be resided to the honors of the altar, and that her feast be established and her office given to the Church, he went much further and declared her to be "the Great Wonder-Worker of the XIX century" thus giving the Church's solemn sanction to those marvelous prodigies alleged to have been worked by the Saint, and effectually silencing the self-constituted critics who had taken on themselves to ridicule her cult in face of overwhelming evidence.

Not long after the same Holy Father gave the Saint the new title of Patroness of the Living Rosary.

As a last act of devotion and with the object of manifesting his personal affection for the Holy Virgin, the Pontiff sent a magnificent gold and silver lamp to her Sanctuary in Mugnano.

Pius IX. Miraculously cured by the Saint. When he became Pope, he made a pilgrimage to her sanctuary on November 7, 1849.

Pius IX was, perhaps, of all the Popes, the one who showed most special devotion to the Saint. When Archbishop of Spoleto he was already her devout client and earnestly spread her devotion. Later on, when Archbishop of Imola he fell dangerously ill and the greatest fears were entertained for his life. Near his bedside stood a beautiful image of his dear Saint who was heard to rap distinctly as she sometimes does, when about to perform some great miracle. Immediately favorable symptoms were noticed in the patient and these speedily developed into rapid convalescence. Years rolled by and the Archbishop became the immortal Pontiff of the Infallibility and the Immaculate Conception.

Far from forgetting his dear patroness when raised to the throne of St. Peter, this great Pope availed himself of his supreme power to shed still greater lustre on the name of St. Philomena.

To the intense joy of the inhabitants of Mugnano, he went on a pilgrimage to the Shrine of his Benefactress where he was solemnly received by the Bishop of Nola, the King, Queen and all the members of the Royal Family of Naples. He said mass on the alter of the Saint and afterwards publicly venerated her relics. He also declared her to be secondary Patroness of the Kingdom of Naples. In the year 1849 he named St. Philomena Patroness of the Children of Mary.

He granted her, later on, a proper office, which is such an extraordinary privilege that rarely or never has it been granted to any other Saint under similar circumstances.

When dying the aged Pontiff sent a most beautiful offering to Mugnano, the last touching tribute of his love and gratitude.

Leo XIII While Cardinal, made two pilgrimages to the Sanctuary.

Leo XIII before becoming Pope made two pilgrimages to Mugnano. Later on when Vicar of Christ he sent a valuable cross to the Sanctuary. He approved the Confraternity of the Saint and raised it to the rank of an Arch confraternity, enriching it with important indulgences.

St. Pius X Elevated the Pious Archconfraternity of Saint Philomena on May 21, 1912, into a Universal Pious Archconfraternity.

St. Pius X was no less devout to the Little Saint, to whom he sent by special envoy a magnificent gold ring and other costly presents. He was always pleased to hear of the wonders she worked.

The Servant of God, Sister Maria Luisa of Jesus. A fervent devotee of the Saint. She founded in Naples the religious order of the Sisters of Our Lady of Sorrows and Saint Philomena.

The Holy Curé of Ars. A great devotee of Saint Philomena, he diffused devotion to her throughout France.

Ven. Pauline Jaricot. Foundress of the Living Rosary and Propagation of the Faith, she was miraculously cured by Saint Philomena on August 10, 1835, and put her forward as the Supporter of Missionary Priests.

Blessed Bartholomew Longo. A devotee of the Little Saint, he placed under her patronage, Opere Pompeane.

St. Peter Juilian Eymard, St. Peter Chanel, St. Anthony Mary Claret, St. Madeleine Sophie Barat, St. Euphrasia Pelletier, St Francis Xavier Cabrini, St. John Nepomucene Neumann, Blessed Anna Maria Taigi.


[edit] Response to Filumenae

I gather from your contributions that you are a devotee of Philomena's, and that she continues to attract devotees among some Roman Catholics. Every source I have consulted, from the extremely sceptical treatment in the 1909 Catholic Encyclopedia, to the Oxford Dictionary of Saints, also consulted, suggests that St Philomena has definitely been dropped from the roster. These sources may be wrong, but they are extant, and if you look you will find the statements in them confirm this present version.

By all means, add information about devotion to St Philomena to the article. If there is another side to the story about her continuing validity as an object of veneration for Roman Catholics, add that as well. I would point out, though, that it's bad form to simply delete all the comments from a talk page, and that I have taken care to preserve yours. Smerdis of Tlön 20:52, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Response posted on Sunday, February 18, 2007
I recently purchased a copy of the Oxford Dictionary of Saints so that I could read for myself the passage to which you refer.
First of all, your statement “has definitely been dropped from the roster.” If you mean she has been removed from the Universal Calendar, you are absolutely correct. If you mean she has been “decanonized” then you are incorrect.
And, to make it clear what the meaning of removal from the Universal Calendar means in practical terms that Catholic churches around the world are no longer required to celebrate her feast, which is still recognized as August 11th. That does not mean that her feast of August 11th cannot be celebrated, as it is by hundreds of churches around the world, those named for her and many that are not, but, have a priest or congregation devoted to her. Again, it just means that they are not required to.
Now, as far as the Oxford Dictionary of Saints, I will choose one passage to illustrate the overall inconstancy of the author’s willingness to rely on fact, rather than his on imagination.
Here is a quote of one section:
“The fame of Philomena spread through Italy aided by a nun’s private revelation that Philomena was a Latin name meaning “daughter of light’ when in reality it is a Greek one meaning ‘beloved’.”
David Farmer, as I too have seen it incorrectly published, has seen reports that the name Philomena is has a Greek translation of “beloved”. That is flatly incorrect. But that is not the most egregious of Mr. Farmer’s laziness to do the work of his research.
Clearly he relied on what others have published on Saint Philomena rather than actually doing the research to confirm what he had read in other publications. Not a mark of a brilliant researcher or credible author.
If he had read a transcript of the nun’s “story”, he would have read that the nun believes that Saint Philomena told her that she was named Lumena. Which, doesn’t take a brain surgeon to recognize probably is a Latin word related to light, (luminous, illuminate, etc.) This nun’s story goes on to reveal that she believes Saint Philomena told her that she was baptized with the name Filumena. Latin for daughter is ‘filia’, and Latin for light is ‘lumena’.
The other fact that is important in getting to the truth is that the nun who had these “revelations” was illiterate. She could neither read nor write. It was her priest that transcribed her story. So, it is probably safe to guess that she was unaware or uneducated in Latin. And since the Italians have translated her name to Filomena, from Filumena and we English speakers have translated the name from Filumena to Philomena and the French to Philomène it is fair to see how the real “fiction” has developed.
One man, an archeologist named Marucchi, a highly regarded early twentieth century italian archeaologist, make a statement of his theory, after never seeing the tiles nor visiting the actual grave site. And the Caholic Encyclopedia picks up and chooses to use his thoery, even though his contemporaries disputed and dissragarded his theory and published it.
Year-after-year other publications, many of which instead of actually doing the research themselves have picked up that ball and expanded on it, until today, there are publicastion that have chosen to completely regard Saint Philomena as a myth rather than saint.
It is amazing to me to see the pattern. I am interested in the truth. Certainly, I personally have a devotion to Saint Philomena. However, I am a relatively new Catholic, so, I am not as married to the “visions” and “appiritions” as my fellow Catholic brothers and sister are. So, for me, the truth is more important to me, based on fact, not fantacy or laziness, or in some cases, down-right stupidity and ignorance of fact, than the “story of Saint Philomena.
I am the volunteer webmaster for the Sanctuary of Saint Philomena and you will see that I have specifically and intentionally split the site into “The Facts” and “The Story.”
The facts, if you take the time to research them, are astonishing. The story, yes charming, but not nearly as important as the facts surrounding the phenomena of Saint Philoemna.
I encorage you to, rather than take the easy-way-out, and “jump on the band wagon” to find out for yourself what the truth is, based on fact, not fiction.
Filumenae

[edit] Response to Smerdis of Tlön

Yes, I am a devotee, but more importantly, I have done a lot of research and found that there is a lot of misunderstanding about this Saint, and Saints in general

First of all, once a Saint is canonized, they are canonized for eternity. They cannot be "uncanonized".

Secondly, Saint Philomena was removed from the Liturgical Calendar in 1961.

Thirdly, yes, there is a movement to petition the Vatican to reinstate her Liturgical Feast.

The removal of her Liturgical Feast from the Calendar was based on research done and presented at the first one hundred year anniversary conference of the discovery of her bones at the Catacombs of Pricilla.

A second conference was just held this past April to mark this year as the second hundred anniversary of the discovery of her bones.

Modern scientific methods were used to take a closer look at the evidence that was first looked at over a hundred years ago.

Including new modern technology unavailable a hundred years ago, new more precise conclusions were revealed disputing the conclusions resulting in the scientific research done a hundred years ago.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinion, and I respect that. What I do not respect is the conclusions of an individual who has not done the research to base their notions on.

It seems to me that you are basing your conclusions on information that was researched over a hundred years ago, the same information that was used to remove Saint Philomena from the Liturgical Calendar in 1961.

My information is based on two published and cited sources, both of which conclude that Philomena likely never existed, and that the incidents of her supposed biography are entirely an imaginative conjecture. The fact is that Philomena has been removed from the church calendar because of "historical problems," Vaticanese for "probably never existed." The question is not whether she was canonized validly, it's whether she existed at all.
Your text as it stands presents POV problems in that it vigorously advocates one position and seeks to dismiss contrary ones. We strive to make articles on controversial subjects as neutral as humans can make them; getting input from users with different viewpoints is one way this is done.
I would also point out that Wikipedia cannot use content "by permission." This is, as the main page indicates, an encyclopedia that "anyone can edit", and that all Wikipedia content is licensed under the terms of the GDFL. These rules prohibit the wholesale importation of copyrighted materials, even with permission of the copyright owner, under any sort of license other than the GDFL. The GDFL permits anyone to revise and edit any text that is added to Wikipedia.
I will revert this page once more. You are once again invited to present your viewpoint within the article itself, but I would ask that you leave both viewpoints represented in the finished text, and that you revise the existing text rather than overwriting it with licensed, copyright materials that cannot be used here. Smerdis of Tlön 15:24, 8 September 2005 (UTC)



Your sources have been disputed with new scientific research done on the slabs found on the tomb of Saint Philomena in the catacombs of Pricilla.

Your logic is similar to those that insist the Nazi Holocaust never happened. Anyone can base an opinion on published articles refuting the Holocaust. That does not mean it never happened. The sources you site, as well as the study the Congregation for Divine Worship based their removing Saint Philomena from the Liturgical Calendar have been dismissed as being based on flawed and extremely old research techniques. Both your sources and the study are no longer relevant.

The facts presented at the Philomenian conference demonstrate that the name on the tomb tiles is Filumenae, Philomena in today’s language. It also proves without any doubt that the slabs were placed on the tomb once. And only once. The study the Congregation for Divine Worship based its opinion on was done in the early part of the 19th century and was based on observation of photos of the slabs. The study which was done late last year was based on close inspeciton of the tomb in Pricilla and on the slabs using extremely sophisticated equipment that was not available last century. Also, current research methods prove that it is blood in the vial discovered with the bones.

I appreciate that Wikipedia strive to offer differing opinions, but it seems to me that they also wish that the opinions presented are based in accepted facts. And if modern research disputes old research they would welcome the truth being presented.

It is my opinion that the Holocaust did occur and that Saint Philomena does exist. Both are based in fact.

The study presented at the Saint Philomena Studies forum in Rome on April 9, 2005 will offer you the opportunity, when published, to base your opinion argued with facts.

In the mean time, I ask that you not insist on presenting your opinion that is misleading, based on the known facts.

[edit] 3RR blocks

I've just blocked two users (User:Filumenae and User:68.228.225.187) for 24 hours for violating 3RR; there are a couple other users who are very close to a 3RR block. I don't care who started it, or who finished it: revert wars are bad, period.

The consensus on this article seems to be in favor of the version I have up now[1]. Changes may be appropriate, but wholesale replacement is not — especially with copyrighted content (you may have permission to reproduce, but do you have permission to relicense as GFDL?), and ESPECIALLY not when there's a "list of vandals" section at the bottom.

If either of the blocked users goes back to his/her old ways when their block expires tomorrow (at ~17:50 UTC), then I'm blocking them again for a longer period and/or protecting the article. However, if they can actually work with other users on original, NPOV content, then I'm willing to give them another chance. - jredmond 18:18, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Change Catherine to Saint Wilgefortis

In 2002, the cultus of Saint Catherine was added back to the Universal Calendar [2], I would like to replace Saint Catherine's name with the name of the false Saint Wilgefortis.

[edit] Removed copyrighted material from section about her removal from the liturgical calendar.

It came from here.-E. abu Filumena 05:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)