[Alex Murphy]

Also working with the human form is Cydra Vaux of Squirrel Hill whose terra-cotta sculptures of a female “Pope Joan” are sure to be an attention grabber. A self-described feminist and a Unitarian Universalist, Vaux says, “I find myself drawn to many different religions and am interested in how they feel about women. When I learned there might have once been a woman pope, I became fascinated and have since made four sculptures of Pope Joan.” Joan was elected pope in 853 and held that office for two years. However, Vaux says, “when people found out she was a woman, because she gave birth, they stoned her and her baby boy to death.” “With my sculpture ‘Pope Joan Revisioned,' I like to imagine what would have happened if women were allowed to be popes: Joan and her son would live,” Vaux says. “With my piece ‘Four Pope Joans' (which features four versions of a pregnant Pope Joan standing back to back), I am celebrating women's unique ability to give life.

[Cicero]

Ignorance is bliss.

[GeronL]

I guess they think blasphemy is artistic

[originalbuckeye]

Sorry. Unitarian Universalists shouldn’t be classified a ‘church’.

[BlueDragon]

Pittsburgh PA, area I'm pretty sure. I mention that for those curious, but not curious enough to go to the link. Since I was wondering, just thought I'd save someone time and effort...

In before another round of was there/was there not a Pope Joan tug-a-war?

What I think may remain not much considered, then possibly discussed other than from one-dimensional or polemical aspect about this "story", is how such things grow legs (rightly or wrongly) then have those same chopped off. Or not.

In this instance, the choppers thinking it only "enemy" propaganda of late invention? But rather in fact, the story was there for quite a while (albeit tenuously) however it arose, apparently believed/semi-believed by the hometeam for quite awhile, too.

What about "stories" repeated so much for so long, they come to be seen as truth but were merely fable all along? And don't get "legs" trimmed? I think I can point to a few of those, but they be more difficult to summarize than the fairly decent (to my eyes) wiki entry for Pope Joan.

We have some local FR legends along too, trying to [ahem] stretch their legs so to speak. Some that have been around for awhile are funny, and pretty much everyone knows it's mainly for laughs. Others, with lot's of view of self, view of their own beliefs and how those are regarded by others --not so funny. We have little wars between libertarian "freedom" conservatives, and those who come across as apologists for State "law & order". Back and forth it goes...

But what does that have to do with "Pope Joan" it may be asked? It's all about belief, baby. It's all about faith itself. Just what should a person put their faith in?

While I contend for my own faith (a guy we refer to in the English language as Jesus, or Jesus Christ being crucified in or near Jerusalem not "faith" for myself...but historical enough for it to be FACT);
Other "religious faiths" have other ideas...

Islam has legs. Look at all those whom believe Mo' (may pork be upon him) was "God's prophet". Conveniently enough for those whom wish for whatever reason to assert that Arab's opinions and musings be "truth", the claim is also made of Mo' that he was God's lastprophet, too.

Mormons even have a "living prophet" or so the claim goes(?) with that in past and possibly still present times fervently believed by many to be "the only" one living at anyone time, or something to that effect.

Rather asserts they be given last say or word, doesn't it? And in those faiths and others, there has long been contention of who should preside over the (cough,cough) revelation. What could that sort of thing tell us of human nature?

What's that some here offended by Pope Joan mentions may be itching to say? Here this thread, this latest from 'our esteemed correspondent' (hehheh) is a prime example of fable? Well...Okey-doke.

But what if fable, additions or distortion of actual truth, rather than being scandalous and hurtful to one's own cause, are instead hurtful or embarrassing to another, and are looked upon as confirmation for one's own pet peeves? What occurs when people begin to widely believe in fable as fact? The ax grinding commences, with various folk looking about seeking to do a bit of chopping with ax? And no, I'm not talking about how Obama and Co., in fear Americans might really get behind some increase of incendiary tool making of their own, thus lead to straightaway (but possibly avoidable, in their mind's) further serious blow-ups, do everything in their power to try and get ahead of ax grinding by folks who look around and see living breathing, crude head-choppers, in their native habitats, gazing skywards at overflying drones. But I'm glad you mentioned it. Please, carry on...

Just because a thing is or can be favorable addition to one view or another, simply believing that a thing be so cannot create truth itself (from a neutral point of view). Well, except for God perhaps? Creating as it were, ex nihilo. What He made, he was able to call "good". Who am I to disagree? I don't. Aah...but made in His image, I have powers of creation myself. Just look at the statues I can make. I can believe in 'em, too. Where does that leave the one true God? Or better asked...did it actually include Him? How could it include Him? It's just a statue.

Here perhaps, the anti-theist throws up a hand, "pick me, pick me, I know the answer!"

Facts do not change. The anti-theist smirks and readily agrees. Perceptions of them can and do. Mileage varies. More smirks...from whomever. Lot's of smirks in this crowd we have here?

Now that I've dangled that, I'm wondering if there be many philosophers 'round 'bout these parts who may be able to read between the lines, who know about local fable (some have begun to fervently believe in both that, along with the righteousness of their "cause") and how those sort of things could be instructive...when stepped back from...wa-aay back, leaving or setting one's own emotion and opinion aside, to hike up onto shall we say a small nearby hill so as better to serenely gaze upon the hubbub? One simply must leave "self" behind lest the dust from the skirmishing cloud one's eyes. Some people start crying for reason of all the dust...?

Not aiming to lecture anyone in particular, (or particularly the OP here -- if leaving my own self out of the instruction) but continuing with this pondering;
Hmmm...where oh, where does that sort of stuff begin (not limited to recent minor, small beer, local incident or condition --- I think I know a great deal about that) and more importantly, where and how will it end? Balkenization has it's inherent drawbacks, possibly strongly affecting all involved. Those involved in that strung-out over many centuries squabbling would likely agree. Still, the instinct for enclave is strong. But is there yet a purpose? find that, and we then better come to know truth, and why we are here. The way of the cross was never promised anyone to be roses, nothing but roses, with no thorn to be found.

1 Corinthians 11:19 (GNT)
No doubt there must be divisions among you so that the ones who are in the right may be clearly seen.

[HarleyD]

From Wikipedia:

References to the female Pope abound in the later Middle Ages and Renaissance. Giovanni Boccaccio wrote about her in De Mulieribus Claris (1353).[4] The Chronicon of Adam of Usk (1404) gives her a name, Agnes, and furthermore mentions a statue in Rome that is said to be of her. This statue had never been mentioned by any earlier writer anywhere; presumably it was an actual statue that came to be taken to be of the female pope. A late-14th-century edition of the Mirabilia Urbis Romae, a guidebook for pilgrims to Rome, tells readers that the female Pope's remains are buried at St. Peter's. It was around this time when a long series of busts of past Popes was made for the Duomo of Siena, which included one of the female pope, named as "Johannes VIII, Foemina de Anglia" and included between Leo IV and Benedict III.

At his trial in 1415, Jan Hus argued that the Church does not necessarily need a pope, because, during the pontificate of "Pope Agnes" (as he also called her), it got on quite well. Hus's opponents at this trial insisted that his argument proved no such thing about the independence of the Church, but they did not dispute that there had been a female pope at all.

There were associated legends as well. In the 1290s, the Dominican Robert of Uzès recounted a vision in which he saw the seat "where, it is said, the pope is proved to be a man." Pope Joan has been associated with marvelous happenings. Giacomo Penzio (fl. 1495-1527), in a work falsely attributed to Petrarch (1304–74), wrote in his Chronica de le Vite de Pontefici et Imperadori Romani that after Pope Joan had been revealed as a woman:

...in Brescia it rained blood for three days and nights. In France there appeared marvelous locusts, which had six wings and very powerful teeth. They flew miraculously through the air, and all drowned in the British Sea. The golden bodies were rejected by the waves of the sea and corrupted the air, so that a great many people died (Francesco Petrarch Chronica de le Vite de Pontefici et Imperadori Romani).

After the Dark Age and Medieval chroniclers, various Protestant writers took up the Pope Joan legend in their anti-Catholic writings. In 1675, a book appeared in English entitled A Present for a Papist: Or the Life and Death of Pope Joan, Plainly Proving Out of the Printed Copies, and Manscriptes of Popish Writers and Others, That a Woman called JOAN, Was Really POPE of ROME, and Was There Deliver'd of a Bastard Son in the Open Street as She Went in Solemn Procession. The book describes, among other stories, an account of the purported Pope Joan giving birth to a son in plain view of all those around, accompanied by a detailed engraving showing a rather surprised looking baby peeking out from under the Pope's robes. The book was penned "By a LOVER of TRUTH, Denying Human Infallibility."[5] According to the preface, the author had been "many years since deceased" and was "highly preferred in the Church of Rome. Alain Boreau attributed the work to Alexander Cooke in his book, The Myth of Pope Joan [6] Furthermore, the preface indicates that the book was first printed in 1602. Even in the 19th century, authors such as Ewaldus Kist and Karl Hase discussed the story as a real occurrence. However, other Protestant writers, such as David Blondel and Gottfried Leibniz, rejected the story.

Interesting, Pope Joan is buried in the Vatican. It seems to me that it would be a simple matter to do a DNA test.

Also, other legends have it that the son became a high ranking church leader.