Posted on 12/24/2024 8:53:55 PM PST by SeekAndFind
The jolly, red-suited Santa Claus who delivers presents on Christmas Eve is a beloved and immediately recognizable figure in much of the world. He is very much a magical, whimsical character, but his origin story has its roots in a real historical person: St. Nicholas of Myra. We know very little of St. Nicholas’ life, but historical evidence does confirm that he was a living, breathing man who lived in the third and fourth centuries CE.
While many of the recorded details about St. Nicholas are quite likely embellished — falling more into the realm of myth than reality — most suggest he lived a life of generosity and service to others. His acts not only helped lay the foundation for the modern Christmas tradition, but also paved the way for the now-iconic figure of Santa Claus, sometimes known as “St. Nick.”
Very little is known about the real-life Nicholas. It’s believed he was born sometime around 280 CE in the Lycian seaport city of Patara, near Myra in modern-day Turkey, which at the time was part of the Roman Empire. It is often said he was born to wealthy Christian parents, and following Jesus’ teachings, he used his entire inheritance to help the needy and sick. While still a young man, he traveled to Palestine and Egypt. Soon after returning to Lycia, he became bishop of Myra.
When the Roman Emperor Diocletian began his persecution of Christians in 303 CE, Nicholas was imprisoned and quite likely tortured. Later, in 325 CE, he may have attended the First Council of Nicaea, a council of Christian bishops convened by the Roman Emperor Constantine I (the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity). Nicholas’ name appears on some, but not all, of the lists of attendees. Being the bishop of Myra, it would make sense that he was in attendance, although perhaps not as one of the more influential participants. According to legend, it was at the Council of Nicaea that Nicholas struck the heretic priest Arius in the face for arguing that Jesus the Son of God was not equal to God the Father.
The exact date of Nicholas’ death is disputed, but it is traditionally considered to be December 6, 343 CE. If correct, St. Nicholas would have been in his 60s or possibly his 70s when he died — a ripe old age at that time.
Within a century of his death, a cult sprung up around the much-admired Nicholas, and he became venerated as a saint (although the Catholic Church did not begin formally canonizing saints until the 10th century). Before long, St. Nicholas became the center of a series of folk legends. One legend tells how he stopped a violent storm to save the crew of an otherwise doomed ship (for which he became the patron saint of sailors), and another tells how he resurrected three children who had been murdered by a butcher (cementing his status as the patron saint of children).
Perhaps the most famous tale involves a poor man with three daughters. The man could not afford to offer a dowry or his daughters to marry any prospective husbands, a situation that could have forced the young women into lives of slavery or prostitution. According to the legend, Nicholas learned of the family’s plight and decided to help. Late one night, he tossed a bag of gold through their window, providing a dowry for the eldest daughter. Another night, he did the same for the second daughter.
When he came to deliver gold for the third daughter, the father was watching. He caught Nicholas in the act and expressed his deep gratitude. Nicholas insisted the man tell no one, saying, “You must thank God alone for providing these gifts in answer to your prayers for deliverance.” True or not, the legend spread — and from this story emerged the enduring association of St. Nicholas with the act of secret gift-giving.
In the first half of the ninth century, a Byzantine monk known as Michael the Archimandrite wrote the first complete hagiography of St. Nicholas. (Many other, less comprehensive works had been written about him previously, and it’s believed the author drew on these heavily.) His account, The Life of Saint Nicholas, further established Nicholas’ reputation, particularly throughout Europe.
By the Middle Ages, St. Nicholas had become one of the most popular and revered saints. He became the patron saint of Apulia in Italy, Sicily in Greece, and Lorraine in France, as well as many cities in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy, Russia, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Thousands of churches were named for him, including 34 in Rome and more than 400 in England. It was during this period that Nicholas’ feast day, December 6, became a traditional day for giving gifts, particularly in European countries. Children would customarily leave shoes, stockings, or boots outside their doors on St. Nicholas Eve (December 5) and find them filled with treats the next morning.
St. Nicholas Day is still recognized in many countries today, but is now far overshadowed by Christmas Day. As European immigrants came to America, different cultural traditions around St. Nicholas began to merge, including the celebration dates, with December 6 being merged into traditional festivities held on December 25. Dutch settlers brought with them Sinterklaas — their version of St. Nicholas — who eventually transformed into Santa Claus. Then, in 1823, came the publication of the Clement Clarke Moore poem “A Visit From St. Nicholas” (better known as “The Night Before Christmas”), which greatly influenced the modern American conception of Santa Claus as a joyful, plump, and toy-bearing figure.
So, while the historical Nicholas is indeed shrouded in myth and legend, he was very much a real person. And while he might not recognize himself in today’s Santa Claus, his core values of generosity, compassion, and caring for children, as well as his association with gift-giving, live on to this day.
Happy Hanukkah
AD is latin,the language of those who crucified. BCE and CE are English, the language of American freedom.
BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!
Santa Claus is NOT REAL!
Its just a silly kids STORY.
(Sorry to all those little kids here on FR.)
Totally ****h-slapped the guy, is what I heard.
PBS had a bio show about him several years ago. Most interesting...
Surprise surprise, nothing like the cartoon character of our time.
But AD means anno Domini--year of the Lord, and CE means "common era." So BCE/CE takes not only Christ but also God out of our dating system, which is why these abbreviations are so beloved by woke academicians. And that's why I will always do a "fixed it for you" every time I see BCE or CE on this site.
So you continue to honor the crucifiers
I don't understand your position. How the use of a Latin expression exalting the Lord honor the crucifiers?
Anyway, happy holidays!
Using the language of the crucifiers honors the crucifiers. English is the language of free people. BCE and CE are English. If you prefer, Before the Christian Era, and the Christian Era.
I have never heard anyone else condemn Latin as the language of Christ's crucifiers (he was railroaded by Amamaic-speakers, and those who carried out the crucifixion probably spoke Greek). As a Christian, I believe that as members of "Adam's helpless race," we are all Christ's crucifiers. As Charles Wesley wrote in 1738, "Died He for me, who caused His pain? For me, who Him to death pursued?"
CE = Christ’s Era
BCE = Before Christ’s Era
Easy as pie. :)
/those who are intellectually honest already profess that the BCE/CE verbiage is mere window dressing
//because it still has the Incarnation and birth of Our Lord as the proverbial Year 0
He was crucified by Latin speakers.
You are entitled to your opinion. This is America.
It is pretty stupid of them to take the Gregorian calendar, which Pope Gregory XIII had introduced in 1582 to replace the Julian calendar, which had become inaccurate over time, and try to use a Catholic calendar to avoid the religious connotations.
It’s doing mental handstands to destroy historical context. And they end up Catholic anyway. Just stupid.
Even if a large percentage of human beings want to avoid referring to Christ because he isn’t associated with THEIR belief system, you can’t do it by saying history doesn’t exist.
Unless they start their zero point in some other place for some convoluted reason and find a real scientific basis for avoiding the Gregorian calendar zero point, they’re just looking plain foolish.
I’m a scientist and a rhino doesn’t become a hippo by renaming it, even if you get every liberal historian to hold hands with every other liberal historian, all close their eyes and chant together, “Hippo, hippo, hippo, hippo.”
Personally, I couldn’t care less what the zero point is or feel that I’m making any theological statement of my belief system when I use BC and AD. I’m using HISTORY, not RELIGION to state dates.
We need a thorough cleansing of museums and universities to get out the anti-historians who are playing 1984 with the past. Until education and history return to pure HISTORY, not pure RELIGION, the school books that children use are going to remain tainted by game playing lies.
It’s just important to keep remembering that belief in Christ is NOT the dominant belief system of people using BC and AD. If anyone tries to say that using it is SAYING it means people are stating a religious belief, they reinforce the idiots who are trying to get the dating changed. It’s about HISTORICAL fact of a Catholic pope setting dates to what was believed to be a historical fact. History is NOT 1984.
I know! Why don’t we really do in the anti-historians and suggest a change to a TWO zero point Trump calendar of January 6th 2020 and January 20th 2024! And we can offer to change dating names to BT1 and BT2 and AT1 and AT2. Then we can make YUGE government grants to any scientist who can come up with an easy new calendar based on the two zero point dating system. Since scientific papers always follow the money source, think of the heartburn of every liberal that doesn’t WANT to do the research, but looks at the glorious pot of gold if they celebrate their Chief Nemesis.
/sarc
Do you find something objectionable about my "opinion"?
This is America.
And how is this relevant to a conversation about the chronological conventions of calendars?
Of course not. You made the excellent point that they used the same zero point and you made the sarcastic comment that that same zero point can be identified with exactly the same meaning to the abbrev that they’re trying to avoid. So you were right and you were funny.
I just made the point that trying to imply that using them means you believe in religion would make most of the world try to find a new zero point. No one believes in religion by using those terms. They ONLY believe in history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.