Commenting goodness

The following is the dialogue from the comments on my St. Valentine's article.

Your lack of knowledge is...tremendous.
Sigh* | 02.25.05 - 9:07 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know who you are, but you seem to like posting anonymous insulting comments on my blog. If you disagree that's fine with me, but have the guts to put a name and some contact info with the comment. As far as the lack of knowledge part, my story comes from a few independant and reliable sources, and is cross verified. If you have evidence to refute this story, feel free to post it for our enlightenment. If all you are going to do is anonymously insult your comments are not welcome and will be removed.
Ryan | 02.28.05 - 4:43 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Roman tradition isn't in direct relation to Juno Februata but "an annual young man's rite of passage to the god Lupercus ". Columbus day has nothing to do with Halloween, although they both happen in October.

The Church tried to abolish this tradition as you said, St Valentine was the Saint they picked to replace Lupercus. I believe he had been dead for 300 years now; the Valentine killed by Caludious II that is. He didn't as you say "Christianized this by having them draw the names of saints" it has the early Church but not actually him who did this. ( Pope Gelasious )


"boys and girls" - of age


That's the main part really. I just do not understand how you can possibly see the Church whoring itself out as cute.

There is more but what's the point.
Sigh* | 03.04.05 - 2:27 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"my story comes from a few independant and reliable sources, and is cross verified."

>_> you meant goggle right?
I never understood why people post NOTHING post. If you have nothing to say maybe silence it the answer.

Yes, I'll be taking that advice too XP
Sigh* | 03.04.05 - 2:29 pm | #


So yeah, random anonymous Joe or Jane posts comments about my Valentine's stuff. I have a few things to say. First note the first comment is devoid of anything but a vague insult. No substance or even a name. Then the second comment he/she made at least has some info. It seems to be conflicting, but I've found lots of info from that era is, even among the experts. But the whoever this jackpot is sorta completely missed the point. So at this point I'd like to thank all the normal people who read my blog (Dave, Alison, Colm, Erin, Lauren, okay, well normal is relative I guess) for having the reading comprehension skills to understand the post was meant to poke fun at the current and commercialistic nature of Valentine's day, and to give some context for it. Also, thank you for getting a chuckle out if it.

To address that whole Church whoring itself comment, I don't know where it's coming from. I don't think I've ever said the word 'cute' on this blog unless I was talking about Erin. And as far as the whoring part, I think one of the greatest parts of the early church was that they had the insight to not romanize everything, but rather to absorb some local traditions in order to connect with the people. I think that's a darn sight better than say the Spainish Conquistadors destroying mayan culture. The modern church is much better at this. I know many missionary types who spend a long time learning the local culture before they ever start to talk about Christ, and some of the african and far eastern traditions that come into the Mass in those parts of the world are awesome.

Finally, if anyone can tell me what the third last and last lines mean, well that'd be great. I'm cool with loose grammar online, but geeze.