Some say that Valentine's Day originated from the fertility festival of Lupercalia that existed in Rome.

Saint Valentine was removed from the church calendar after the Second Vatican Council. The story is that Valentine was a bishop who lived in the third century - during the persecutions in Rome. The Church removed him from the calendar along with some other saints because there are more legends about his life and activities than historical records.

He was more a saint of marriage rather than of courtship. Having faith in Christ was a fairly problematic political act at that time. If you wanted to practice religion, you could either worship the recognized pagan god of Rome, or you could worship the statue of the emperor. It is clear that Christians wouldn't do either of these. To believe in Christ was therefore illegal. Evangelizing someone was considered a serious anti-national activity. Secretly helping persecuted Christians was contempt of the emperor and therefore treason itself.

Unlike today, Christians in those days were peace-loving people who believed in non-violence. Therefore, they would not join the military. According to the general morale of the military at that time, a soldier had to commit acts of violence or even murder. The law required that all unmarried young men had to do military service. What Bishop Valentne did was to marry Christian youth so that they would not be drafted to the military. Thus, he carried out anti-national political activities in various counts. Naturally, he did not go down well with the empire. The empire killed him - on February 14. That's another story about the origin of the Valentine's Day.

It is possible that Christian culture replaced the open festival of debauchery and lust with Valentine's. In any case, if asked whether we should have Lupercalia or Valentine, what do you think most people would opt for: Lupercalia or Valentine's?