Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!seismo!umcp-cs!cvl!harwood From: harwood@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) Newsgroups: soc.women,talk.religion.misc Subject: Re: Church decision on whether women have souls: Results. Message-ID: <1679@cvl.UUCP> Date: Thu, 18-Sep-86 11:23:29 EDT Article-I.D.: cvl.1679 Posted: Thu Sep 18 11:23:29 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 20-Sep-86 04:29:57 EDT References: <2738@pogo.UUCP> Reply-To: harwood@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) Distribution: na Organization: Center for Automation Research, Univ. of Md. Lines: 120 In article <2738@pogo.UUCP> daveb@pogo.UUCP (Dave Butler) writes: > > Well folks the verdict is in; the Catholic Church did indeed hold an > official council on whether women had souls and you women did just make >it by one vote. I now have 3 references: _The_Rape_Of_The_A*P*E*_ by >Allen Sherman (page 202 for those who care), _Why_We_Burn:_Sexism_Exorcised_, >written by Meg Bowman and appeared in _The_Humanist_ magazine in the >November/December 83' issue and finally, an article witten by Dottie Lamm >(wife of the governor of Colorado) that appeared in the November 6th 1983 >Denver Post. The title of the article was > _Tracing_Anger:_Its_roots_are_in_history_ >and the excerpt from the article is as follows: > > "Are Women Human?" (In the year 584, in Lyons, France, 43 Catholic > bishops and twenty men representing other bishops, after a lengthy > debate, took a vote. The results were: 32, yes; 31, no. Women > were declared human by one vote.) ---Council of Macon, France. > > If you wish to find references to this council in Catholic literature >and: > 1. you don't read french or latin or > 2. you don't have access to rare books, > >give it up. I searched through copious compendiums on church councils and >history. Each of these books professed to be a veritable fount of Catholic >knowledge. Only the _Catholic_Encyclopedia_ even mentions the council, and >it refuses to discuss the decisions and votes made (If I sound slightly >irritated, its because I am. You try searching through 17 or more 300 page >tomes which have all embarassing facts edited out). One of the other catholic >embarassments was the _Malleus_Maleficarum_ ("Hammer of Witches") written >in 1448 for Pope Innocent VIII. It started out as a treatise on witch >hunting, but ended up as a mysogynist's handbook. Here's some excerpts: > > Beware of women when they weep. They are only bent on causing > evil, and their tears are false. > It is unwise for a man to marry. A wife is a destroyer of > friendship, a temptress, a threat to the household, a bringer of > misfortune, an evil. Woman is more bitter than death itself. She > seeks to ensnare and trap. He who is righteous will avoid her, > take flight from her. Only the sinner will permit himself to succumb > to her. > The minds of women are light and incapable of producing aught > that is wise or good. > Women can but destroy what men have created. > Women are repulsive to the touch. In intercourse, they are deadly > dangerous. The man who lies with them seeks death. > Women seek the destruction of man. Fear and despise them. > >This book was kept around for hundreds of years (the church put out 28 >editions) and 3 different Popes endorsed it as official church law. > > If you happen to think that this purely Catholic demigogery, forget it. >The 3 sources I've got enumerate examples from every major religion and >nationality (You should here some of the things Martin Luthor said). > > I want to thank the people that wrote me about my search for this >council. Some wrote to wish me luck. Some wrote to say that while they >thought I was serious in my quest, I was definitely mistaken and misled. >Some wrote to tell me I was obviously a slanderous flame-baiter. To all >these people I say thank you; you all encouraged me to search harder for >the truth. To those who supported and helped me: thanks, I couldn't have >succeeded without you. To those who thought I was probably a nice person, but >definitely misled: never underestimate the stupidity, bigotry and prejudice >of any organized religion or government. To the highly insultable reactionary >types: next time someone says that your sacred cow is deseased, before >throwing stones, look at the beast; they might be right. > > Special thanks to: > Mary Jo Williams(udenva!mwilliams) who sent me the reference to > Dottie Lamms article, > Dottie Lamm for sending me a copy of the article, > Ken Arnold (cgl.ucsf.edu!arnold) for the reference to > _The_Rape_Of_The_A*P*E*_. > > > Enjoyed this Immensely, > > Dave Butler > > > Remember: Silly is a state of Mind, Stupid is a way of Life. > > P.S. When I first politely made my request for information about the > council to the net there was a stampede to tell me how wrong I was and > that I should apologize. But when I posted my preliminary results, > there was a thundering silence. Wonder why that is. > > P.S.S. I guess I don't owe the church or the net an apology. /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Our Catholic Church has been wrong about many things, and its refusal to be publicly repentant for historical sins and atrocities remains an immense scandal to what the great apostle called the Gospel of reconciliation in Christ - the same Paul who proclaimed that in Christ, there is neither Jew or Gentile, master or slave, male or female,... but that all are equal in the spirit of Christ. You go on to say concerning your remarks, quoted in full above: > If you happen to think that this purely Catholic demigogery, forget it. and > Enjoyed this Immensely, Elsewhere Paul says that we should "speak the truth in love." The Church has not always done this. However, I never doubted for a moment but that you "Immensely" enjoy "demigogery" (sic), as you say, which is not "purely Catholic" -- but which, in this uncharitable world, is almost a universal, shall we say 'catholic', profession. Sinner among a Catholic Church, David Harwood