Jump to content

Talk:Whitby Abbey: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
assessment
No edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:


I changed the sentence about the Synod of Whitby to reflect the fact that the church did not adopt Roman ways but rather had the their adoption forced upon them by the Northumbrian king of the time. [[User:Velkyal|Velkyal]] ([[User talk:Velkyal|talk]]) 10:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I changed the sentence about the Synod of Whitby to reflect the fact that the church did not adopt Roman ways but rather had the their adoption forced upon them by the Northumbrian king of the time. [[User:Velkyal|Velkyal]] ([[User talk:Velkyal|talk]]) 10:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

==Viking Attack deleted==

Today most historians are beginning to doubt the fact that Vikings attacked the place due to extreme lack of evidence for it, both from literary sources of its time and archaeological evidence.

Revision as of 10:28, 13 August 2010

"reconciled" to the Catholic Church?

Was the decision of the Synod of Whitby really a reconciliation? Wouldn't that suggest that the Celtic Church had once been part of the Roman Catholic Church - which didn't really exist until the 4th century. The Celtic Church is anything was within the family of the Orthodox Churches and was crushed by Wilfrid and his Romanizers.

I agree. I think the word "subjected" would be better. Harry Stoteles 16:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"adoption"

Use of the word "adopted" is certainly better than the original "reconciled", however the word itself does suggest that the Celtic Church were willing participants in the change rather than the victims of a pre-meditated act of spiritual imperialism.

Synod of Whitby change

I changed the sentence about the Synod of Whitby to reflect the fact that the church did not adopt Roman ways but rather had the their adoption forced upon them by the Northumbrian king of the time. Velkyal (talk) 10:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viking Attack deleted

Today most historians are beginning to doubt the fact that Vikings attacked the place due to extreme lack of evidence for it, both from literary sources of its time and archaeological evidence.