This is worth a read, the article and especially the comments. In the above link, as in this matter of "19th Century Lesbian Convent Murders," those who participate make the whole place smell like the National Perspirer and do the devil's work by pulling people down into scandals.
No wonder our political FReeper brethren rarely come to the Religion Forum. No wonder we can't even recommend that our own families or fellow parishioners join us here online. It's because the Religion Forum is the nastiest neighborhood in this our Free Republic.
There are even better reasons why "rash judgment," "detraction," "calumny," scandal-mongering," "revilement," and "malicious talk" are listed as sins in the Scriptures.
A little more immersion in the Gospels, and --- in particular --- the Epistle of St. James, should leave one adequately instructed and reproved.
But I will end with St. Paul:
2 Timothy 2:23-26 -
Have nothing to do with stupid and senseless controversies;
you know that they breed quarrels.
And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome
but kindly to everyone,
an apt teacher, patient,
correcting opponents with gentleness.
God may perhaps grant that they will repent
and come to know the truth,
and that they may escape from the snare of the devil,
having been held captive by him to do his will.
#96
***It’s because the Religion Forum is the nastiest neighborhood in this our Free Republic.***
The fact that constant, day-in-and-day-out Catholic bashing is allowed is why I no longer financially support FR.
I'm not going to even bother with the Forbes article.
I think I read that one before anyway.
"Wolf, a professor of ecclesiastical history at University of Muenster, Germany, made the discovery and has retold it in his book The Nuns of Sant'Ambrogio."
And when those in authority heard of what was going on at that place -- what happened? They shut the place down.
So-- what 'scandal' is that for the Roman Catholic Church itself?
It's not like such goings-on were being supported, or that lesbo's were being quietly shifted from parish to parish (where they would continue their little peccadilloes...)
Perhaps you are correct to compare the two -- this lesbo nun book, and the Tuam mother and baby home story, as in how these kind of things can play out on the pages of FR.
In both, there was something of a knee-jerk, hair-partially-on-fire response from 'scandalized' Roman Catholics.
As for the book -- that was allegedly sourced from Vatican archives, if we can believe the article...
For the Tuam babies ---- there most certainly was a 'septic tank' designated on an old map of the place -- right about where the discovery of infant and small child sized human remains were.
Corliss denies saying the word "dumped". She never denied supplying the information which included strong possibility that the structure which eventually became used as burial vault was originally built to be a septic tank -- as one old map indicates that it was.
Yet there is more to the Tuam story that I came across -- that has yet to make it to the pages of FreeRepublic.
Not only were there adults from the work house days found buried on the North side of the property (which there was some slight mention of on these pages)...but not far from the 'septic tank' location...there was yet another area of graves discovered...
According to a woman who claimed she fell into a collapsed portion -- she saw shelves with what she perceived were small bodies, stacked neatly in rows.
I've lost the link to that -- but could find it again -- maybe -- but it could take me hours of rooting around, though one of the articles about use of ground-penetrating radar at the site, may be where I first encountered the info?
For it was in "comments" to an online article -- which led to an Irish radio personality who had done a bit of digging into the issue on his own, and on a few pages he had up last summer, supplied valid information which many here seem to not have seen or contemplated -- or else they would not be saying the things which they do -- like -- "it was a burial vault" (as if that had been actually proven instead of just conjectured) and that there is a map which indicates "septic" not "burial", etc... Oh, and there were even some 'architectural drawings' from the 19th century which show tunnel-like affair which lead to "tanks" outside of the footprint of the buildings themselves.
And the man who with a friend opened the 'septic tank' structure? The same radio show reporter-guy who interviewed him, also said the man related that as a boy he had encountered and explored tunnels on the Tuam property.
These kind of things could help explain why in the 'tank' (whatever it truly was) which was accessed from the top -- the bodies were in something of a disorganized pile, yet for the other "collapsed" area which a woman fell partially into (according to what seems to be as yet to be uncorroborated story) there were "shelves" and orderliness.
That area --- had been accessed by a tunnel perhaps?
So now do the right thing, Mrs. Don-o, and ping all the people which you pinged to your initial response to me on this thread, and let them question myself directly.
All I need is one single polite individual who is willing to concede the strong possibility that there was a map designating "septic tank" (or similar) right about where the underground structure where the piles of bones of babies and small children were discovered --- and I will spend the hours of digging around on the internet to -- find the map, and more.
Like -- provide here to these pages again link to the radio show interview with the individual who encountered the "tank" structure full of bones.
If you don't ping all those persons -- then let everyone see your own efforts for what they are.
Damage control. Down with all critics of the RCC! Up with "the Church" at all costs, including insinuations aimed at discrediting my own person, and my own integrity.
If you have something real on that last aspect -- BRING IT -- and spell it out. If you have something real to say -- then say it. Don't just insinuate.
Thank you for the ping, Mrs. Don-o. I share your concerns. I’ll check the Forbes article.
Long ago, I began to be wary of anything printed in the Daily Mail without checking it three times over. It often overstates the case and the case sometimes falls apart because of the overkill.
Hang in there - you are important to the Catholic forums.