ABC Pushes Anti-Catholic "Pope Joan" Tale

Newsbusters.org ^ | 28 December 2005 | Dave Pierre

[infoguy]

Check out the promotional ad for this Thursday evening's (December 29, 2005) episode of ABC's Primetime. The promo is for the story, "On the Trail of Pope Joan" (audiotape on file; emphasis mine):

"Diane Sawyer takes you on the trail of a passionate mystery. Just as intriguing as The Da Vinci Code. Chasing down centuries-old clues hidden even inside the Vatican. Could a woman disguised as a man have been Pope? Thursday night. One astonishing Primetime."

It doesn't get much uglier than this, folks. Quite simply, there was never a female pope, or "Pope Joan." The tale is a complete fabrication dating back to the 13th century - nearly 400 years after the reported "reign" of the so-called "Joan." For reliable summaries of the bogus tale, see this and this. Scholars debunked the fable hundreds of years ago, and recent books (this and this, for example) have further repudiated it.

Over the centuries, the "Pope Joan" story has been used as a slanderous tool to tarnish the Catholic Church and degrade Catholics. In his acclaimed 2003 book The New Anti-Catholicism, Philip Jenkins writes, "The Pope Joan legend is a venerable staple of the anti-Catholic mythology" (page 89). Jenkins adds,

"Though it has not the slightest foundation ... [f]rom the sixteenth century through the nineteenth, the tale was beloved by Protestants, since it testified to Catholic stupidity ... [Today] Pope Joan enjoys a lively presence on the Web, where feminist anti-Catholics celebrate her existence much as did seventeenth-century Calvinists" (page 89).

That a major network like ABC would lend credibility to such a vicious anti-Catholic smear is deplorable.

What could be worse? Donna Woolfolk Cross' novel, Pope Joan, seeks to advance the stature and validity of the fictional character, and a movie of this book is currently in production. Yikes.

[Cheburashka]

Similar yarn:

Once each of the children was supposed to draw a crayon picture of some event from Christ's life.

One child drew a picture of an airplane with three people looking out the passenger windows, and one person in front at the controls.

"What are you drawing?"

"Oh, this is the Flight into Egypt. See, the first passenger is Baby Jesus, the second is Mary, and the third is Joseph."

"But who is that in front?"

"Why, that's Pontius the Pilot."

[Antoninus]

The percentage of people that actually believe that is miniscule.

Such a consideration has NEVER stopped the news media from running an anti-Catholic hit-piece.

Secondly, these happened in recent history and the facts are easily verifiable.

And yet such opinions persist and the verification is called into question by the crack-pot set.

Something that happened over a 1000 years ago, especially when it's based on nothing more than one group or another stated the fact is not as easily verifiable.

Thus, it is much more likely to be a myth made up out of whole cloth, particularly when not one contemporary source ever mentioned it

[billbears]

You're ignorant of the history of the Catholic Church as well as the history of Christianity.

How so? Because I don't buy into anything and everything positive that's said about one denomination of Christianity?

St. Ignatius of Antioch Letter to the Smyrneans 107 AD

Searched my Bible and can't find one reference to Ignatius, the Eucharist, or bishops. Although the Lord's Supper is referenced, nothing about Eucharist. Sorry.

[WhiteGuy]

Thanks for the heads up, it sounds like an interesting story.

[Antoninus]

The fact is that these rumors exist and have some basis. They may be true or false. Unless you're using faith, all history is hear-say anyway.

Uh, when a rumor can be backed up with facts, it's called 'history.' When someone takes a rumor that has no basis in fact and uses it to ridicule an institution which is beloved by hundreds of millions of people, that is what's known as 'slander.'

[WKB]

Peter Jennings Reporting: UFOs — Seeing Is Believing


Bryant Gumball was chasing UFOs on Sci Fi last night.

[Antoninus]

Searched my Bible and can't find one reference to Ignatius, the Eucharist, or bishops. Although the Lord's Supper is referenced, nothing about Eucharist. Sorry.

And yet you're so quick to buy into the Popess Joan story? Where's Popess Joan in the bible? Does Diane Sawyer have more authority in your pantheon of sources than Ignatius of Antioch?

[Freebird Forever]

Searched my Bible

Stick with the Good Book.

You'll find more truth in there than in all of the religious dogmas combined.

[billbears]

Such a consideration has NEVER stopped the news media from running an anti-Catholic hit-piece.

Except the fact that there are quite a few more people that question the current and past dealings of the popes. Catholicism is not the majority religion in this country. And yet you would have the media not appeal to the majority of their audience who may find it interesting? How about they just stick to the history of corruption in the church that caused Martin Luther to go into action? Can that be discussed in an open forum such as television?

And yet such opinions persist and the verification is called into question by the crack-pot set.

Seriously, I can't believe you're still trying to equate the cracked views held by one thousandth of one percent of people to a possible myth about some guy mired in the Dark Ages. It's not that big a deal.

Thus, it is much more likely to be a myth made up out of whole cloth, particularly when not one contemporary source ever mentioned it

It's thousand year old history! New facts come to light about history all the time. Secondly it has nothing to do with the Christian faith whatsoever. Just whether what amounted to a politician of the day was covering up their true sexuality.

History provides us multiple cases of women who dressed up as men to go to war for numerous reasons. They did it and some of them were not found out until the end of their lives. If they did it, I imagine somebody who was supposed to remain celibate, thereby no one seeing them in the nude, a lot easier. It's a plausible story. Don't know if I believe the whole birth in the parade or out hunting idea but the general story is plausible

[billbears]

And yet you're so quick to buy into the Popess Joan story? Where's Popess Joan in the bible?

And where's the idea of a pope or a bishop in the Bible? I must note it interesting that you capitalize pope but not Bible. Why is that? Just an observation

Does Diane Sawyer have more authority in your pantheon of sources than Ignatius of Antioch?

Considering both of them were discussing issues with little to no Biblical background? About the same.

[mware]

Than there was the time I was chaperoning a group of 8th graders through Arlington National Cemetery. As we headed up the hills towards the Tomb of the Unknown, one of the girls stopped dead in her tracks and exclaimed, "So that is where he is buried, I always wondered where they buried him."

I looked up to see what American hero she was talking about.

One the headstone was one word,

Moses

[Antoninus]

Catholicism is not the majority religion in this country. And yet you would have the media not appeal to the majority of their audience who may find it interesting?

No, but we are a very large plurality--and by far the largest sect of Christianity in the US and the World--and growing. And the vast majority of Americans are not Catholic haters who are willing to give consideration to every spurious anti-Catholic story that comes down the media wire.

How about they just stick to the history of corruption in the church that caused Martin Luther to go into action? Can that be discussed in an open forum such as television?

As if Martin Luther was some paragon of virtue and not an arrogant, pride-filled so-and-so that fractured Christendom and helped usher in hundreds of years of internicene strife in Europe. Lord knows that such corruption as is piously decried by Luther and the other 'reformers' has never stained any of the thousands of Protestant sects that subsequently sprung up. But we'll leave that statement be. How is it good for the sake of Christianity in general for us to be rehashing the old, primarily extinct grievances over and over again?

Seriously, I can't believe you're still trying to equate the cracked views held by one thousandth of one percent of people to a possible myth about some guy mired in the Dark Ages. It's not that big a deal.

When a lie is presented as the truth for the purpose of attacking the Catholic Church, it is a big deal to me.

New facts come to light about history all the time.

You'll notice that this is not based on any new facts. Just the same old lies.

It's a plausible story.

I'm sure that's exactly what the people who watch Diane Sawyer's report will be saying--even though it's a lie. That's the whole point.

[Antoninus]

And where's the idea of a pope or a bishop in the Bible? I must note it interesting that you capitalize pope but not Bible. Why is that? Just an observation.

I guess that makes me just a papist scum then, eh?

I wrote: Does Diane Sawyer have more authority in your pantheon of sources than Ignatius of Antioch?

You responded: Considering both of them were discussing issues with little to no Biblical background? About the same.

Oh, that's a keeper!

It's statements like that which make it very hard to take some folks seriously at all.

[RightWhale]

There wouldn't be these kinds of problems if we all lived 1000 years. Of course, some arguments can go on forever even when things happened just last year.

[billbears]

No, but we are a very large plurality--and by far the largest sect of Christianity in the US and the World--and growing. And the vast majority of Americans are not Catholic haters who are willing to give consideration to every spurious anti-Catholic story that comes down the media wire.

We're not talking about the world, we're talking about this nation of states. And FWIW, giving consideration to historical stories does not make one anti-Catholic. I would just like to see multiple opinions on the issue. To tell you the truth, I may have just skipped the show but this thread has got me interested in watching it.

As if Martin Luther was some paragon of virtue and not an arrogant, pride-filled so-and-so that fractured Christendom and helped usher in hundreds of years of internicene strife in Europe. Lord knows that such corruption as is piously decried by Luther and the other 'reformers' has never stained any of the thousands of Protestant sects that subsequently sprung up. But we'll leave that statement be.

Never said he was a saint. But he was just a man, just like the pope of the time.

How is it good for the sake of Christianity in general for us to be rehashing the old, primarily extinct grievances over and over again?

You tell me. How is it good for the sake of Christianity to have prayers to different people the church calls saints? I don't remember reading about prayers to or for the dead in the Bible either. But some churches do advocate them.

When a lie is presented as the truth for the purpose of attacking the Catholic Church, it is a big deal to me.

You say it's a lie, I say it's an unsubstantiated myth.

You'll notice that this is not based on any new facts. Just the same old lies.

Well heck, some of what's done in the church (Catholic and Protestant) is based more on repetition and tradition than it is on Biblical truths. Why don't you go into church one day and tell the priest to quit swinging that jar of incense around while chanting in Latin? I'll go into church to ask them to quit whining about Christian music with guitars and tell them to quit congregating to talk in little cliques? All these stances could very easily to be said to be un-Biblical. We'll meet back here to see how it went.

[billbears]

I guess that makes me just a papist scum then, eh?

No it doesn't make you anything. I just noticed it and wondered if there was a reason, perhaps subliminal, that you didn't even realize you did it.

Considering both of them were discussing issues with little to no Biblical background? About the same.

Well? Point out the Biblical teaching for a hierarchy of the level found within the Catholic church.

[SuziQ]

YAWN

[Irish_Thatcherite]

Again, LOL!!

[Iscool]

An attack on the Catholic Church is an attack on the oldest institution in Christianity. Any actual Christian would be concerned.

Don't be makin' stuff up...I'm an actual Christian, I am NOT Catholic and I am not concerned...

[Luis Gonzalez]

"It doesn't get much uglier than this, folks."

You have GOT to be kidding!

Morning Edition, October 12, 2005 · Records released by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles paint a picture of a church hierarchy that repeatedly failed to protect child victims. In an out-of-court settlement reached with the lawyers for 560 alleged victims, the archdiocese agreed to make public the personnel records of 126 priests accused of sexual abuse.

The files show that for more than 75 years, the nation's largest Catholic archdiocese shipped priests accused of sexual abuse back and forth between therapy and new assignments, often ignoring the complaints of parishioners. At least eight priests accused of sexual misconduct were allowed to remain in contact with children.

That's just LA!

I'll take the movie over this any time.