colin (imported) wrote: Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:19 pm Anyway, even in the 11th Century married clergy were not unknown and after that it was not uncommon for a priest to have a 'hearth-maid'.

"Hearth Maid' HA!

Some of them had a whole 'frigging' Convent at their disposal.

However...well, ya can't beat this...

Brigham Young was never a neutah...

A pansy, or fairy or fruitah.

Where ten thousan virgins

Succumbed to his 'urgin's

We now have the great state of Utah...

A-1

ooooooooooooooomannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn i bet thats why they passed me by who would of thought.

I think the Catholics are harder to understand in a lot ways than other religions, but we all have our quirks.

There is a text in the Old Testament that says a eunuch cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. However, a passage in the New Testament tells of the Ethiopian eunuch asking Paul about that text, and Paul tells him not to worry, he'll have no trouble getting in.

Pope Ratzi - - uh, rather Pope Benedict definitely has balls to stand up and wave his modesty in public.

By the way - how does a pope prove he has balls? Does he stain his underwear or provide a DNA sample? ? ? ?

just wondering

Imagine being the poor soul who has to watch and write a certification of "testicles in good working order"

(alter boys?)

I realey dont like getting religion in here and i realey dont want to offend anyone but since it has already come up let me quote what is written in the old testment in Isaiah 65v4 For this is what the lord says to the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths who choose what pleases me and hold fast to my covenant to them i will give within my tempel and its walls a memorial and a name better than sons and daughters.I will give them an everlasting name that will not be cut off.

What i am telling you is if you are a eunuch and you are afraid you have angered your god this is proof that you havent

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxi culpa...

A-1

Thanks, Sag, I somehow forgot about that one. It was Deuteronomy 23:1-3 that says eunuchs, bastards, Ammonites, and Moabites will "not enter into the congregation of the LORD." The Bible does annoyingly contradict itself.

Here's what the Catholic Encyclopedia has to say about "Popess Joan."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08407a.htm

Apparently, this was a myth, once widely believed, since discredited.

This passage discusses the supposed investigation of Papal testicles, apparently also untrue. Pope Joan passed into European legend.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encycl ... e_Joan.htm

Sometimes myth is so appealing that we make it true by collective belief.

bobov (imported) wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2005 6:46 pm Here's what the Catholic Encyclopedia has to say about "Popess Joan."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08407a.htm

Apparently, this was a myth, once widely believed, since discredited.

This passage discusses the supposed investigation of Papal testicles, apparently also untrue. Pope Joan passed into European legend.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encycl ... e_Joan.htm

Sometimes myth is so appealing that we make it true by collective belief.

Although I think that 'Pope Joan' probably is a myth, I certainly would not take what the Catholic Encylopedia has to say on the subject as being proof positive. It is very partisan in the information which it is prepared to publish.

In the past there have been a number of subjects on which their information has been shown to be diametrically opposed to that recorded in contemporary, non-catholic sources. Facts which might lead to criticism of the RC church are either not included or are recorded in a negated fashion - the phrase 'being economical with the truth' does spring to mind. Of course, it is only in a court of law where one is required to state 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

LOL

colin (imported) wrote: Sun May 01, 2005 11:37 am Although I think that 'Pope Joan' probably is a myth, I certainly would not take what the Catholic Encylopedia has to say on the subject as being proof positive. It is very partisan in the information which it is prepared to publish.

In the past there have been a number of subjects on which their information has been shown to be diametrically opposed to that recorded in contemporary, non-catholic sources. Facts which might lead to criticism of the RC church are either not included or are recorded in a negated fashion - the phrase 'being economical with the truth' does spring to mind. Of course, it is only in a court of law where one is required to state 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

LOL

Very true! I only can agree to that!