| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
16 Dec 2005 07:20:49 PM |
| Object: |
Try, try again re skeptic Pope Leo quote... |
My previous posting a fortnight ago regarding this burning [to me, at
least] question yielded, alas, nuttin' but a big fat yawn from all you
disbelievin' folk herein. That was surprising as well as
disappointing, because it was in this very newsgroup that I first read
(sometime around 1999, if I recall correctly) this papal anecdote!
But I'm an optimist as well as an agnostic, so I'm trying again.
The story went more or less as follows:
Either Pope Leo IX or Leo X had just concluded an audience with some
dignitary. As Leo was returning to his chambers with his aides, he
offhandedly (and surely out of earshot from his visitor, who was
presumably exiting in a different direction) said to one or more of his
assistants something to the effect of, "Yeah, well, as if anyone really
believes any of this nonsense..."
What I'm hoping to get from y'all is any of the following: (1) which
Leo said it; (2) what he had been discussing with his visitor; (3) who
the visitor was; (4) their location (if not in Vatican); and (5) at
least the year, if not the specific date of the remark.
And barring the availability of any of those details, can anyone
recommend a book where I might dig this up? (I'm anxious to use it on
the air, ideally in the next week or so.)
Thanks in advance!
Skeptically yours,
BRYAN STYBLE/Seattle
KIRO Newstalk Radio
.
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Try, try again re skeptic Pope Leo quote... |
17 Dec 2005 01:42:48 AM |
|
|
I think yo mean this post:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/910e2e79911d948b?dmode=source&hl=en
Cheers
RadioactiveSeattle@hotmail.com wrote:
My previous posting a fortnight ago regarding this burning [to me, at
least] question yielded, alas, nuttin' but a big fat yawn from all you
disbelievin' folk herein. That was surprising as well as
disappoin ting, because it was in this very newsgroup that I first read
(sometime around 1999, if I recall correctly) this papal anecdote!
But I'm an optimist as well as an agnostic, so I'm trying again.
The story went more or less as follows:
Eith er Pope Leo IX or Leo X had just concluded an audience with some
dignitary. As Leo was returning to his chambers with his aides, he
offhandedly (and surely out of earshot from his visitor, who was
presumably exiting in a different direction) said t o one or more of his
assistants something to the effect of, "Yeah, well, as if anyone really
believes any of this nonsense..."
What I'm hoping to get from y'all is any of the following: (1) which
Leo said it; (2) what he had been discussing with his visitor; (3) who
the visitor was; (4) their location (if not in Vatican); and (5) at
least the year, if not the specific date of the remark.
And barring the availability of any of those details, can anyone
recommend a book where I might dig this up? (I'm anxious to use it on
the air, ideally in the next week or so.)
Thanks in advance!
Skeptically yours,
BRYAN STYBLE/Seattle
KIRO Newstalk Radio
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Try, try again re skeptic Pope Leo quote... |
17 Dec 2005 01:55:45 AM |
|
|
More:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Pope_Leo_X
http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=600018630&start=105&tstart=0
http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/deception.htm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Try, try again re skeptic Pope Leo quote... |
17 Dec 2005 02:23:48 PM |
|
|
On 16 Dec 2005 17:20:49 -0800, wrote:
My previous posting a fortnight ago regarding this burning [to me, at
least] question yielded, alas, nuttin' but a big fat yawn from all you
disbelievin' folk herein. That was surprising as well as
disappointing, because it was in this very newsgroup that I first read
(sometime around 1999, if I recall correctly) this papal anecdote!
But I'm an optimist as well as an agnostic, so I'm trying again.
The story went more or less as follows:
Either Pope Leo IX or Leo X had just concluded an audience with some
dignitary. As Leo was returning to his chambers with his aides, he
offhandedly (and surely out of earshot from his visitor, who was
presumably exiting in a different direction) said to one or more of his
assistants something to the effect of, "Yeah, well, as if anyone really
believes any of this nonsense..."
What I'm hoping to get from y'all is any of the following: (1) which
Leo said it; (2) what he had been discussing with his visitor; (3) who
the visitor was; (4) their location (if not in Vatican); and (5) at
least the year, if not the specific date of the remark.
And barring the availability of any of those details, can anyone
recommend a book where I might dig this up? (I'm anxious to use it on
the air, ideally in the next week or so.)
Thanks in advance!
Skeptically yours,
BRYAN STYBLE/Seattle
KIRO Newstalk Radio
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/popeleox.html
Leo's Line
Did Pope Leo X Really Refer to Jesus as a Myth?
James Patrick Holding
If you've hung around low-rent skeptical web pages at all, you have
probably seen this gotcha quote at one time or another:
"What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us!" Pope Leo X.
Before I worked for my state's prison system, I had a job as a
researcher at my state's department which oversaw emergency medical
services. During that year I worked there, I had several requests
concerning a chemical called viton. The word had gotten around to EMS
and law enforcement personnel nationwide that this very dangerous
chemical was found in various automobile parts, and that if there was
an accident and there was a fire involved, the viton could be released
and would eat through protective clothes and flesh in an instant.
Sound too wild to be true? It was -- this was a rumor that was passed
uncritically from one source to the next, without any verification.
"Viton" did not exist as such (it is actually something used in the
rubber to make o-rings). After the third inquiry I decided to try and
track the rumor to its source if I could. I tracked backwards from a
sheriff's department in rural Nevada, to a slightly larger law
enforcement agency in Utah, who pinned the blame on a fax they
received from a consulting firm in San Antonio -- which turned out not
to exist. Ultimately, however, the rumor seemed to go back to a tow
truck operator in Florida.
I bring up this story as an example paralleling the story of the quote
above. This quote is referenced by countless skeptical sites on the
Internet. Troubled by this one? Don't waste any sweat, or any viton
for that matter. First of all, as I've noted before, it's not as
though some offhand comment by a single Pope is enough to overturn
1500-2000 years of relevant secular and religious scholarship. The
skeptics would like for you to believe that perhaps old Leo committed
a serious gaffe here in which he admitted what was otherwise hidden
for nearly 1500 years, namely, that Christ never actually existed, but
those of us living outside of Area 51 need only realize that Leo's
words, if genuine, need be taken as no more authoritative than those
of, say, Joseph Wheless, who also quoted it.
And speaking of Wheless -- in doing my trace on this quote, I found
that he is actually one of the earliest persons who made use of this
quote for skeptical purposes; the other earliest person was Robert
Taylor -- author from the 19th century of his own ridiculous works,
including one claiming that the entire Bible was written by Egyptian
monks in 250 BC [Diegesis, 429], and he uses a slightly different
version of the quote. In the process of research I scoured the web for
any pages that were using this quote, to see if anyone could give me a
source earlier than Taylor. Here's some interesting data:
* The quote is used mostly by skeptics of the intellectual low
rent district -- people like Acharya S, Brooks Trubee, and deceased
Nazi-pusher Revilo P. Oliver, who will accept anything that makes
Christianity look bad, even at the cost of selling their integrity.
The Secular Web folks don't use it that I found, other than in their
historical curiosities section where they keep the works of Wheless.
Shamefully, the quote is also used by some anti-Catholic/KJV-Only sort
of sites.
* The overwhelming majority of sites who use the quote provide
only the quote and attribution, and nothing else. No context, no
citation. In other words, they pass it around uncritically. That's
Warning Bell #1.
* Warning Bell #2 is the fact that only two sites that I have
found so far offer any sort of context. One claims the quote was made
in the presence of one of Leo's staffers, Pietro Bembo. Another
(written by Revilo P. Oliver) says that the quote was made in the
presence of "intimates." Neither provides a citation or a source for
this information. (But the first does turn out to be right, sort of --
keep reading!)
* Warning Bell #3 takes a little knowledge to hear ringing
clearly. A small number of sites (including Trubee's) do give a
citation, which looks like this:
(Encyc. Brit., 14th Ed. xix, pg. 217).
Ah, encyclopedias! The best sources around for top-flight
third-grade research. But here's the facts: neither Trubee nor anyone
using this cite (which is reproduced exactly this way everywhere I
have found it, also suggesting that it is being passed around
uncritically) actually picked up a 14th ed. of Britannica and found
this quote. Britannica's 14th edition was printed from 1929-1973, long
before any of these websites were a twinkle in their Webmaster's eyes,
and in some cases, when some of these people were in diapers. But with
the help of an alert reader in the UK, I now have photocopies of the
relevant pages from the 14th edition. Vol. 19, where this quote is
supposed to be, doesn't even contain the article on Leo X, which is in
Vol. 13. Vol. 19 is from "Raynal to Sarreguemines" and p. 217 is the
middle of an article on Respiration. Nice pix of a pigeon's lungs and
a goat's branchiole, but no Leo. The actual Leo article from pp. 926-7
of Vol. 13 says a lot about Leo's lackadaisical attitude towards
spending, but has no mention of the "fable" quote either way. Just for
kicks now, the 15th edition of Britannica, which I have access to,
does not say anything about this quote in its article on Leo, and I
have received a copy -- from an associate in a New Zealand library --
of the 11th edition article, which also lacks the quote. Britannica
does not know or care about this quote at all.
Early in my research I decided, for an experiment, to have
someone ask several skeptics who use this quote where they got it
from. The "best" answer came from someone who attributed it to an
author named Jovius, in a work called De Vita Leonis X, published in
1551. We were told that this was in the "Vatican Archives." When we
asked whether this person had actually seen this item at the Vatican,
we were told that the skeptic "knew someone who had access, once, long
ago" and encouraged us to look up the item in a search engine. I did
this -- the item is referenced in the Catholic Encyclopedia article
noted below, which specifically says that this saying does not come
down to us from Leo. Scholarship by gossip!
That alternative view, presented by this item from the online
Catholic Encyclopedia, claims rather than the quote originated with a
near-contemporary of Leo, a Catholic apostate named John Bale. No cite
is given of any work where the quote appears; this is no better than
what the skeptics offer, for my purposes. A couple of the skeptics
have been asked about this Bale attribution, and significantly, their
answers don't amount to much. Acharya tells an inquirer that the quote
to Leo "has been widely reported in numerous texts," and for her,
that's good enough reason to think it genuine. Yes, scholarship by
gossip again. Another skeptic, who never gives his name but offers a
very amateurish and annoying set of essays under an address sort of
like askwhy.co.uk, replied to an inquirer by ripping into the Catholic
Encyclopedia article for not 'fessing up to Leo's bad habits in other
areas, but never actually answers the question posed, "Where did this
quote come from?"
Next step: An alert reader has informed me that John Bale, who
was a member of the Carmelite order, was a playwright. The following
is found here:
John Bale (1495-1563) was an Englishman who had joined the
Carmelites and was educated at Cambridge where he was first exposed to
Protestant ideals. He abandoned the order by 1535 and enjoyed the
protection and patronage of leading pro-Protestant factions in the
court of Henry VIII. During this time he wrote a number of plays and
several tracts that attacked the papacy....
This is confirmed by The Complete Plays of John Bale (ed. Peter
Happe), who notes that Bale in his plays "introduced a variety of
matter to satirise the Roman Church and parody its rites and customs."
[15] Our alert reader referred me also to Joseph McCabe's,
Rationalist's Encyclopedia, which has an article on Leo X, which says:
The statement that he said, "We owe all this to the fable of
Jesus Christ," appears in the work of an ex-priest long after his
death, and we cannot check it. Encyclopaedia articles on Leo are based
upon Roscoe's Life and Pontificate of Leo X (4 vols., 1805), which is
very unreliable.
McCabe's "ex-priest" is probably John Bale, but McCabe was being
a little slippery here. I doubt if McCabe had any worthwhile authority
to say whether or not Roscoe's work was reliable or not (McCabe offers
no specifics, but seems to hint that it should have said more about
Leo's supposed sexual misadventures -- our research assistant
"Punkish" reports that Roscoe was indeed criticized for making Leo his
hero, but not because of unreliability), but news flash: It does
explain where the quote came from. I obtained an 1853 reprint of this
book, in 2 volumes. On page 387-8 of Vol. 2, Roscoe notes that poor
Leo has been the subject of extremes of praise and scurrilous insult
-- among the latter, a quote indeed from a satirical work of Bale
(with a "historical" format) entitled The Pageant of Popes. I
previously thought that this work was lost, but it turns out that it
is still around in the UK, and a helpful reader there has provided
photocopies. In this work Bale "professes it to be his intention to
give [the Catholic Church] double according to her works" and places
this quote in Leo's mouth as a reply, yes, to Mr. Bembo after the
latter read a passage from the Gospels. (Ironically, even in Roscoe's
time, he says with perhaps some exasperation, this story "has been
repeated by three or four hundred different writers, without any
authority whatsoever, except that of the author above referred to.")
Let's have a look at that quote as it appears in the Pageant (material
found on pages ranging from 179-180):
Leo the tenth was a Florentine borne, of the noble house of
Medicea, and called ere he were Pope John Medices. He being Deacon and
Cardinal of Saint Maries, contrarie to all hope was chosen to succede
Julius. He beinge diligetly from his youth trained up in learning
under learned schoolmaisters, and especially one Angelus Politianus,
did afterward greatly favour learned men. When he was but. xiv. yeres
olde he was made cardinall by Innocentius the. viii. and at the yeres
of xxxviii. he obtained the papacie. This Leo was of his owne nature a
gentil and quiet person:but often times ruled by those that were
cruell and contencious men, whom he suffered to do in many matters
according to their insolent wil. He addicting himselfe to nicenesse,
and takinge ease did pamper his fleshe in diverse vanities and carnal
pleasures: At banqueting he delighted greatly in wine and musike: but
had no care of preaching the Gospell, nay was rather a cruell
persecutour of those that began then, as Luther and other to reveale
the light thereof: for on a time when a cardinall Bembus did move a
question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuouse
aunswere saiying: All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that
fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie: Sleidan faith he
sente letters and bulles of pardons into all nations for suche as
woulde give money for them, the effectes of his pardons were diverse,
some especially to sell licence to eate butter, chese, egges, milke,
and fleshe upon forbidden dates, and for this purpose he sent divers
treasurers into al coutreis, and namelye one Samson a monke of
Millaine into Germany, who by these pardons gathered out of sundrie
places such hewge sommes of money that the worlde wondered at it, for
he offered in one day to geve for the Papacie above an hundred and
twentie thousand duckates.
You might think, "Well, this sounds pretty historical overall."
But check the next section:
Martin Luther being singularly wel studied in the
scriptures, and cotinuing at Wittemberge in Germanye (where these
pardons polled maynely) began to enforme and teache the people howe
muche they were abbused, to give such greate sommes of money for suche
trifles as were nothing profitable, and wished the to be better
advised in bestowing theyr money, whereupon he purchased the Popes
bitter curse against him and his adherents, to the no littell
disturbance of the whole estate of Germanye: for because by the
preaching of Luther, and his bookes painting out the treacherie of the
court of Rome, the princes of Germanye, as the Duke of Saxony, the
Lantgraue and other wold not yelde so much as in time past the Pope
had commanded by usurpation. The Emperour and they in the ende fell
together by the eares, by the Popes procurement, as at large is set
forth in Sleidan, and can not so aptly in this place be reported.
Other enormities which in the Popes pardons moved Luther were these:
The people were perswaded that if they bought these pardons they nede
not to seke any further for salvation, and that no sinne coulde be so
horryble, but that by these indulgences it shuld be forgeven, and that
the sowles that lye tormented in Purgatorie shoulde flie into heaven
forthwith, as sone as the money receyved for these pardons at the
charge of their friendes shoulde be put into the Popes cofers. But to
returne to Pope Leo: he made xxxi. cardinals in one day, wherby he got
greate bribes and muche treasure, but the same day appeared manye
horrible fightes and great tempestes arose, with vehement windes,
thonders and lightninges, vehementlye runshinge upon the Churche where
the Pope and his Cardinals were with such force, y it shooke downe an
idol made for the picture of Christ like a childe in the lappe of the
virgine Marye: also it broke S. Peters keyes out of his hand. These
things were enterpreted to prognosticate the decay of the Popes
kingdome, and thereupon many wrote bitter verses.
In the next section, Bale explains that as Leo went out to
conduct Mass, a "great roofe of Marble stone" fell down behind him,
killing some of his guards. Does anyone -- any skeptic especially --
want to argue that Bale is writing history here? Bale was not a
historian, but he had plenty against the Catholic Church. Here are
some quotes from his Dedication to the Pageant:
For as the holye ghoste hath taughte mee I have called that
Romaine Sinagogge the mutherer of Godlye men, wicked Jesabell, the
horned beast, the impe of the Drago, the doughter of the devill, the
spouse of Sathan, speaking blasphemies, the purple beast, the
misticall Babilon, the great strumpet with whom the kinges of the
earth have comitted fornication, which have dronke of the wyne of her
fornication, the woma cloathed in purple, scarlet, gould, pearles and
precious stones, having a goulden cuppe full of all filthines & lustes
of the world, the mother of fornication, and droncke with the bloud of
the saintes of JESUS CHRIST, the habitatio of devils, and the cage of
all evill spirites and hatefull birdes....
There is yet a thirde matter which forced mee hereunto, and
having seene and heard these thinges vehemently moved me to write.
This is the precepte of Christe in the xviii. Chapter of the
Revelationof S. John: For a voyce came from heaven from the right hand
of the father and the everlasting throne of Christe, with a great
voyce founded in our eares saying: Go from her my people lest ye be
made partakers of her wickedness, and ye receive part of her
punishment. For her sinnes are gone up to heaven, and God hath
remembred her wickednes. And thou commaundemet followeth which was
given against the beast with seven heades. Reward her even as she hath
rewarded you, and give her double according to her works, and poure in
double to her in the same cup which she filled unto you. And forasmuch
as she glorified her selfe and lived wantonly, so much poure you into
her of punshment and sorrowe. This is the worde of the Lorde declared
unto us as well here as in the fiftye Chap. of Jeremy. That this
serpent might perish & all his doinges brought to nought. Yet for al
this I do wel remeber the sayings of S. Paule, that al Princes ought
to be honoured although they be wicked and unprofitable for a common
wealth, because they be placed there of God, neither to speake evill
of them beinge but wormes, dust and ashes, Neither dare I murmur
against the providence of God, which is contrary to his holy worde.
Therefore from the bottome of my hart I beseech our Lorde and Redeemer
Jesus Christe, that he woulde have mercye uppon all Kinges, Princes
and Nations, and so provide that all nations maye be so governed as is
most tending to his glory: For whole reveng he hath most stoutly
fortifyed mee up in this my old age. Not studying to derogate or take
awaye the honour from anye christian Kinge, but onely to invey against
the Romishe beast, the Synagog of Sathan, and most wicked Antichrist,
with the writings and testimonye of most learned men.
If the vehemencye of my stile shall offende thee, beholde
the marvelous force of the holye ghoste in the Prophete David and most
holy king, who in the Lordes cause most stoutlye saide: I have hated
the congregation of the wicked, Psal. 25. He promiseth also afterwarde
by his Prohpetes, that he woulde destroye the brothell houses and
wicked places, Ezechi. 16. I will shewe fayth the Lord unto all
Nations thy nakednes, and to al kingdomes thy shame Nahum. 3. Thy
dishonour and filthines shall be opened, and thy reproche shall be
seene, I will be revenged, and none shall resiste mee, Esay 47. Woe be
unto those Kinges as manye as have worshipped the beast or have ayded
her, or have received helpe of her, or have committed fornication with
her, as many as have served her, and have joyned handes against the
Lambe, and waged battell for her cause, because their names are not
written in the booke of lyfe from the beginninge of the worlde. And
the Lambe shel overcome them at the last like a Lorde of Lordes, and
kinge of kinges, and they shall go together with the beast to
destruction and utter dampnation, Apocalips 17. GOD therefore give in
the hartes of Christians whom the x. hornes do shadowe, that they maye
make her desolate and leave her naked, that they maye eate her fleshe
and burne her in fire, that is, let her abide her last punshment for
the sheding of the innocent blood, of so manye faithfull Christians.
Be it done, Be it done. Amen.
In short, the evidence indicates that the skeptics are posting
fiction as fact, using the work of someone who thought the Catholic
Church to be the ***** of Babylon.
So then -- based on the data, as far as I'm concerned, anyone
using this quote for polemical purposes deserves to have their license
to think revoked. But if any skeptic can answer the questions
following, providing documentation for their replies, I will revoke
this essay and report the facts. Not allowing Bale as a source, the
questions are:
o When did Leo make this statement (the year is enough)?
o To whom did Leo make it, and who heard it?
o What was the context that prompted Leo to make this
statement?
o In what document did those who heard it, report it?
o What reaction, if any, was there to this statement?
o In what contemporary works is all of this reported?
o Based on the above, show what in context the "fable" Leo
refers to -- the entire existence of a man named Jesus? Not his
existence, but just certain events? Etc.
I think that's enough to keep the Peanut Gallery busy for a
while, don't you?
Now for a brief update. It seems we've managed to get a few
Skeppies to check out their consciences and remove the Leo line from
their sites. One of these, Mr. Brooks "I Ain't No Bigot, You
Google-Eyed Pinhead Fanatic Barbarian" Trubee, was prodded by a reader
to remove the line, and here is what else he had to say:
It is interesting that [Holding] feels so threatened by the
idea that Pope Leo X was an atheist. In his article, [Holding] glosses
over the real story about Leo X, namely that he was one of the most
corrupt, morally bankrupt popes the Catholic Church has inflicted on
the world. In fact, it has been claimed that this pope's excesses were
so outrageous that he helped ignite the Protestant reformation. If
[Holding] really wants to embrace Pope Leo X as a beloved brother in
Christ, he is perfectly free to do so.
Gee heck, man. I had no idea this was an article about Leo's
lifestyle. I really, really thought it was about how Skeptics used his
fabricated quote. Was Leo an atheist? I don't care. Was he a moral
mess? I don't doubt it. Was he a brother in Christ? I have no idea, I
don't have his spirit here. What's really interesting is the need L'il
Brooks sees to insert his own personal psychoanalysis (was his use of
the quote a sign that he was "threatened" by religious truth?) and
change the subject from a red horse to a blue one. No surprise there.
Brooks been runnin' from real arguments from our quarters since Day 1.
As I say in my article, "You may be a fundamentalist atheist if...":
You think if a Christian won't address your arguments, they are
too frightened to do so, or know they can't answer them; but if they
do address your arguments, you think it is because they are
"threatened" by them.
Another update! One of Acharya's crowd had this to say about
this article:
J P Holding, a Christian Auntie for agonized believers on
the web, thinks he is a bit of an intellectual and a wit. He writes a
sort of who-dunnit intending to show that the citation of Leo X is
spurious, but embarasses himself by getting to the exact source.
Because it proves to be a Christian source, the apologist has to
resort to running down an otherwise well regarded Christian.
"Running down"? Now that's a good one from the Hyper Pit. What's
the Acharya Nut mean by this? Well:
Bale was, like most sixteenth century Protestants outraged
by the corruption of Catholicism, and he wrote many critical and
ironical works to show the Catholic hierarchy for what they were.
Particularly outrageous was the Pope's selling of indulgences, and
Holding actually gives a further extract from Bale to show this,
apparently wanting to show Bale as extreme....
No, actually, not at all. Bale was "normal" when it comes to
objecting to indulgences. However, Nut shows his colors with the next
comment on the omens Bale describes (the wind and the keys of St.
Pete, etc.):
Holding seems to think that Bale's mention of bizarre
prognostications, shows he is unhistorical, a strange attitude for a
man to take who believes in the bizarre events readily accepted by
Christians in their bible. The prognostications do not seem half as
strange as those that Holding believes with no sweat at all.
Actually, no again. That Bale wrote this as a satire -- which
Happe identifies as Bale's genre -- is what shows it is
"unhistorical". It was never meant as a history. I inserted the part
about the omens to ask Skeptics if THEY were willing to take the
matter as historical and Bale's intent as such. If they want the fable
quote to be historical, what of this? I would have no problem
accepting Bale's report of supernaturalism, prima facie -- if this
were actually a document of historical intent -- but it isn't. Chalk
another up for Acharya's fans who can't or don't read well.
The Nut closes, "If Holding is right in making Bale into a liar,
then he is illustrating Christian dishonesty." No more a liar than
Monty Python, actually, so take that one to the cracker box and
crumble it. "If Bale was indeed a liar and his alleged quotation of
Leo X was false, then why was it remembered for so long?" It wasn't.
The "fable" quote was revived by Robert Taylor, the jailhouse lunatic
who confused an Isaac Watts hymn with one for Prometheus, and Wheless
followed Taylor uncritically (McCabe did not, however) and gave
uncritical Skeptics their grist. The quote was not remembered at all
out of care or concern. Contrast: If the quote was true, why was it's
context so quickly forgotten?
Note, 7/05: Tekton Research Assistant "Punkish" brought our
attention to a discussion here between Roger Pearse and another person
who claimed the source of the quote as Pope Alexander VI.
/end
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
