This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saints, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christianliturgical calendars on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.
The current "Saint Bibiana" article confuses two different women from two different centuries. A good source is the Los Angeles Archdiocese website, http://www.la-archdiocese.org/about/heritage/vibiana.html. The painting in the current article is a painting of St. Vibiana, the patroness of Los Angeles. She was martyred in the *third* century, and her relics occupy a chapel at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, in Los Angeles. Her tomb, discovered in the mid-19th century, said that she was laid to rest on August 31st. That is the eve of her feast day now, her feast day proper being September 1st, still observed by many churches and monasteries in Southern California.
The St. Bibiana described in the *text* of the current article is a *different* woman, martyred in the *fourth* century, whose relics are in her cathedral at Rome. (Bernini worked on the building.) Her feast day, as noted in the current article, is December 2nd.
220.127.116.11 19:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Ashley Faulkner, firstname.lastname@example.org
Yes, I agree with the previous post. There are two Saint Vibianas and the current article has confused the two into one. The Wiki article needs to be re-edited.