|
Hi Michael,
It's a misunderstanding.
At that time, it was determined that there was precious little historical
information on these saints, who had a large crowd of devotees. Given
that during the first 1,400 years of the Church's history, saints were declared
by popular acclaim, it's not surprising that saints with dubious credentials
gained popularity.
It was decided it would be best therefore, to suppress
on the universal calendar, the feasts of saints with little or no historical
evidence. That is, their feast days had been celebrated throughout the
world, but now they would not be. Some are still celebrated on local calendars,
although some have had their cult suppressed entirely, which I suppose
is a way of saying let's not go there.
If there were purely imaginary saints, this should not cause us any distress
as they were declared, as I said, during a time when popularity governed
(popular acclaim) who was declared a saint, and the Church had no formal opportunity to screen
them.
It would not be surprising, under the circumstances of the time, if
some imaginary saints made it through, while at the same time, there was no negative reflection
on the Church today, which now screens saints much more carefully in its
canonization process.
This article on St. Christopher deals with the issue:
Hope this answers your question!
Eric Ewanco
|
