From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2003 #422 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Websites: http://www.jmdl.com http://www.jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Tuesday, August 26 2003 Volume 2003 : Number 422 Sign up now for JoniFest 2003! http://www.jonifest.com ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- more from the Baltimore catechism very njc [vince ] Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc [Murphycopy@aol.com] Re: more from the Baltimore catechism very njc [Murphycopy@aol.com] Re: more from the Baltimore catechism very njc [vince ] Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc ["Lama, Jim L'Hommedieu" ] Joni on Rolling Stone's poll of top guitarists ["Kate Bennett" ] RC church - njc ["Wally Kairuz" ] eve, adam & lilith ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc ["kakki" ] Today in History: August 26 [ljirvin@jmdl.com] Today's Library Links: August 26 [ljirvin@jmdl.com] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:21:50 -0400 From: vince Subject: more from the Baltimore catechism very njc 47. Q. What is the sin called which we inherit from our first parents? A. The sin which we inherit from our first parents is called Original Sin. 48. Q. Why is this sin called original? A. This sin is called original because it comes down to us from our first parents, and we are brought into the world with its guilt on our souls. 49. Q. Does this corruption of our nature remain in us after Original Sin is forgiven? A. This corruption of our nature and other punishments remain in us after Original Sin is forgiven. It remains that we may merit by overcoming its temptations; and also that we may be kept humble by remembering our former sinful and unhappy state. 50. Q. Was anyone ever preserved from Original Sin? A. The Blessed Virgin Mary, through the merits of her divine Son, was preserved free from the guilt of Original Sin, and this privilege is called her Immaculate Conception. The Blessed Virgin was to be the Mother of the Son of God. Now it would not be proper for the Mother of God to be even for one moment the servant of the devil, or under his power. If the Blessed Virgin had been in Original Sin, she would have been in the service of the devil. Whatever disgraces a mother disgraces also her son; so Our Lord would never permit His dear Mother to be subject to the devil, and consequently He, through His merits, saved her from Original Sin. She is the only one of the whole human race who enjoys this great privilege, and it is called her "Immaculate Conception," that is, she was conceived-brought into existence by her mother-without having any spot or stain of sin upon her soul, and hence without Original Sin. Our Lord came into the world to crush the power which the devil had exercised over men from the fall of Adam. This He did by meriting grace for them and giving them this spiritual help to withstand the devil in all his attacks upon them. As the Blessed Mother was never under the devil's power, next to God she has the greatest strength against him, and she will help us to resist him if we seek her aid. The devil himself knows her power and fears her, and if he sees her coming to our assistance will quickly fly. Never fail, then, in time of temptation to call upon our Blessed Mother; she will hear and help you and pray to God for you. the source for this is http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Catechism/4/bk4ls5.html#RTFToC6 what is original sin - it was what Mary was free of because of the Immaculate Conception, that is, Sex. It is a round about argument to get there but a "temptation" here and there lead us to the place when original sin is equated with sex, and since Mary was without sex, she was without original sin. Read Question 50 again - does it not say that Mary was also immaculately conceived because she, the mother of Jesus,. could not be borne "in the service of the devil. Whatever disgraces a mother disgraces also her son; so Our Lord would never permit His dear Mother to be subject to the devil, and consequently He, through His merits, saved her from Original Sin. She is the only one of the whole human race who enjoys this great privilege, and it is called her "Immaculate Conception," that is, she was conceived-brought into existence by her mother-without having any spot or stain of sin upon her soul, and hence without Original Sin. " The clear equation of original sin and sex was never clearer than in #50. Sex is the service of the devil. And away we go into much theology written in the past two thousand years that Eve is an archetype for sin (i.e. temptress sex) and Mary is the archetype of purity (non tempting perpetual virginity). And for thus is the fact that much is made of virgins in the one church body in particular, and some in the orthodox. Ever wonder why a nun traditionally dressed the way she did? To cover her hair (hair is sexy) to her ankles (ankles are sexy) and only her unadorned face (cosmetics are sexy) and hand (in service to Christ whose ring they wear) are visible to downplay any possibility of the nun as a sexual figure. Protestant fundamentalism is pretty similar in its approach to sin and sex and Eve and women so this calls out no one church, much could be said of orthodoxy and many strands of Judaism as well as Islam (which shares the Adam and Eve myths). Not particular to one church, present in at least three different faiths in various expressions. Vince ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:33:46 EDT From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc Kakki writes: << I was exposed to anti-Catholic bigotry as a child and it amazed me then and amazes me even more to see some of it displayed here on the list all these years later >> Well then I probably should probably state a big MEA CULPA here, Kakki! But I really think we may have different ideas of what anti-Catholic bigotry is. Although I detest bigotry in all its forms, I am comfortable badmouthing the Catholic church because they hurt me when I was a vulnerable child. No, I wasn't raped, but I did end up having to try my best to get by while living IN TERROR of some of the things I was taught to be the Truth. And let's face it; more than any other religion on the face of the earth, the Catholic church is run by a bureaucracy and bureaucracies are mostly full of crap. What's more, it drives me batty to see the church keep trying to lower the cash amount of damages to the victims of priest rape here in the Boston area. They keep claiming they don't have the money when the Catholic church is probab ly one of the world's richest entities. For a class action suit involving scores of people they are trying to settle for something like $57 million. But they somehow don't have the money! They own billions in Boston area real estate. And I'll bet there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of works of art IN STORAGE in the Vatican that would fetch much more than $57 million at auction. But the church doesn't have the money. Yeah, right. I read an article some time in the last year that said that the church is basically beginning to write off North America and concentrate their development (i.e., growth) in countries where there is more illiteracy because Catholicism in developed countries has led to the "cafeteria-style" brand of American Catholicism where people don't take what the church says as, well, gospel once they have a little bit of education. The church isn't used to a lot of questioning and that's exactly what they're getting from Catholic people who don't like the way they operate. (I could go on here for a week with example of crap that has happened to friends, family, people I've heard of, etc., etc.) Individual faith is one thing, and I would generally never criticize someone for religious belief. But criticism of the corrupt and majorly flawed institution of Catholicism is something very different from anti-Catholic bigotry in my mind. Except for the Mormons, I can't think of another religion that is run as such a bureaucracy with a home office (Vatican/SLC) and all. So to equate criticism of the church with anti-Catholic bigotry is just off base, as far as I am concerned. So in summary -- I love Catholics, it's the church I can't stand. --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:38:03 EDT From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: more from the Baltimore catechism very njc Vince asks: << 47. Q. What is the sin called which we inherit from our first parents? >> Noses that are prone to become bulbous with age? --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:41:01 -0400 From: vince Subject: Re: more from the Baltimore catechism very njc No wonder the nuns beat you. Murphycopy@aol.com wrote: >Vince asks: > ><< 47. Q. What is the sin called which we inherit from our first > parents? >> > >Noses that are prone to become bulbous with age? > > --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:46:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: more from the Baltimore catechism very njc --- vince wrote: > 47. Q. What is the sin called which we > inherit from our first > parents? > > > A. The sin which we inherit from our first > parents is called > Original Sin. > You know, Vince, I thought I had successfully repressed all that sh*t from my childhood. Thanks so much for bringing it all back to me - sheesh! (you know I'm kidding. Sort of.) ===== Catherine Toronto ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:50:45 -0400 From: vince Subject: Re: more from the Baltimore catechism very njc Have some cookies with the kids and call me in the morning. Catherine McKay wrote: > --- vince wrote: > 47. >Q. What is the sin called which we inherit from our first > parents? >A. The sin which we inherit from our first >parents is called Original Sin. > > >You know, Vince, I thought I had successfully >repressed all that sh*t from my childhood. Thanks so >much for bringing it all back to me - sheesh! (you >know I'm kidding. Sort of.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:52:39 EDT From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: more from the Baltimore catechism very njc Vince writes: << No wonder the nuns beat you. >> LOL! An astute observation, Vince. Though to be fair to the bloodless brides, they *only* pinched me until I cried. --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:54:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc --- Murphycopy@aol.com wrote: > Although I detest bigotry in all its forms, I am > comfortable badmouthing the > Catholic church because they hurt me when I was a > vulnerable child. Bob, I totally get this. As an ex-Catholic, I have no problem bad-mouthing the church, because I've been there - but not recently, eh ;) Saying negative stuff about your own religion or ethnic group doesn't strike me as bigotry really - to me bigotry is when people mouth off about stuff they don't understand (but think they do.) I also recognize that there's a lot of good stuff about Catholicism and Catholics; but for me, the bad outweighs the good - if they'd just shut up about abortion and gays and just about anything related to SEX, then maybe I could deal with it. But they're always on about that stuff and how evil it all is, while they cover up their own evil-doings and try to blame it on the victim. > I read an article some time in the last year that > said that the church is > basically beginning to write off North America and > concentrate their development > (i.e., growth) in countries where there is more > illiteracy because Catholicism > in developed countries has led to the > "cafeteria-style" brand of American > Catholicism where people don't take what the church > says as, well, gospel once > they have a little bit of education. The church > isn't used to a lot of > questioning and that's exactly what they're getting > from Catholic people who don't like > the way they operate. Personally, I love cafeterias. There's so much choice. Let's open a new church called the Holy Cafeteria and see how many people show up - we serve up religion like you likes it! ===== Catherine Toronto ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 00:06:40 -0400 From: "Lama, Jim L'Hommedieu" Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc Kakki and Mark, In the Episcopalian confirmation classes I took about 1968, the flavor was that Paradise was lost because of Eve's vanity. Adam kinda shrugged, stupidly. The implications were very clear: 1.) Men will blindly follow their women and can't be held accountable. 2.) Women, on the other hand, are held to a higher standard. (I don't agree with that. No one needs to 'correct' me on this. I'm quoting the party line in my particular church from more than 30 years ago.) Maybe the Episcopalians were more direct about this than the Catholics but I remember Mark's "slant" on this as familiar. That is to say, I heard it once and it err.... appropriately passed though my digestive tract without any lasting effect. In 1968, I was more influenced by the images of women in the Bond movies! This was an instant before I started reading Rolling Stone and passed forever into the abyss of the Eternally Damned. Lama, now playing Shawn Colvin's "STEADY ON". Ahhhhhhh. Balance is restored. First your near vision goes, then you have zero appetite for excitement. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:17:55 -0700 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc > Personally, I love cafeterias. There's so much choice. > Let's open a new church called the Holy Cafeteria and > see how many people show up - we serve up religion > like you likes it! > Isn't this called 'Unity'? ;-) Mark E in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:30:55 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Joni on Rolling Stone's poll of top guitarists >Reuters reports that Joni Mitchell came in at #72 on Rolling Stone's list of the 100 top guitarists of all time. Jimi Hendrix is number 1. The only other woman to make the list is Joan Jett, at #87. Not sure from the Reuters article if this is a reader's poll or a creation of the Rollling Stone editors. I can think of a couple of other women who might deserve to make such a list. Didn't someone on the list recently mention Ellen McIlwaine? What about Rory Block?< how about bonnie raitt, shawn colvin, nancy wilson just off the tippy top of my head! ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 01:50:41 -0300 From: "Wally Kairuz" Subject: RE: Performance Photos are up jim, the photos are EXTRAORDINARY. congratulations on such a lot of hard work and dedication. wally > -----Mensaje original----- > De: owner-joni@jmdl.com [mailto:owner-joni@jmdl.com]En nombre de > jlamadoo@fuse.net > Enviado el: Lunes, 25 de Agosto de 2003 07:03 p.m. > Para: joni@smoe.org > Asunto: Performance Photos are up > > > I'm done. All of my performance shots are up on Chris Marshall's > > http://www.hatstand.org/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album26 > > If you click on <4> you can go to the newly posted performance > shots. (You can skip over everything I posted last week.) > > The shots are all different shapes and sizes, like JMDLers I suppose, > because I cropped them. The song circle photo took 4 hours to > build but I really like it. I did that one over and over and > over. I think I scanned it four times, each time bigger to get > more detail. > > The one of Bree giving someone a standing ovation got a very > tight crop. I > had the top of her hat in the neg but it moves better with her hat chopped > off. She jumps right out of the frame and that's the whole point, > eh? > > Enjoy, > > Lama > > Apologies to joni-onlys! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 02:02:50 -0300 From: "Wally Kairuz" Subject: RC church - njc i have been a roman catholic all my life. i have been both embraced and persecuted by the church. the church gave me the god of my childhood, whom i still revere and serve, and the church gave the status of sinner and second-class worshipper of jesus. i am a member of nation, a people whose government has been usurped and misused. i will always fight the church hierarchy and i will always be a roman catholic. this pope, like many other popes before him, is a crook and a fascist. i will forever denounce his opinions and those of his partners in crime: the bishops that collaborated with the military in argentina during the 70's, the cardinals that aid and abet, the nuns and priests behind genocide and oppression, the opus dei, the perpetrators of so much hate --of which homophobia and misogyny are but the tip of the iceberg. but i will always be roman catholic. all those criminals won't succeed in making me an exile in my own family. they will go FIRST. wally ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:06:37 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: eve, adam & lilith i was raised protestant & don't recall the exact teachings but if memory serves i did come away from it all thinking that eve was being blaimed for being the one to give into tempation, then tempting adam... & from what i recall learning about lilith, it had something to do with demanding equality with adam (not being made from his rib)...this is from some foggy memory, i may be totally off on this one... how far have we actually come from the magd. laundry kind of mentality? i have a friend who worked for years with battered woman & rape victims & i remember how frustrating it was for her to deal with the police because the prevailing attitude in the force was that the women had somehow played a part, brought it on...times have changed (thanks to the professionals who educated the police) but its only very recently... ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:27:35 -0700 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: Magdalene Laundries - njc Murphy and Catherine, I have no problem at all with Catholics criticizing, renouncing or saying whatever they want about their religion and do not consider that anti-Catholic bigotry. Maybe I should have said that in my last post but sometimes what is clear to me is not clear when I write it to others, I guess. Catholics, ex or otherwise, have the biggests right to criticize and question - they are the ones who have had the personal experience with the negative side of the bureaucracy. I'm not going to get into what I think are signs of such bigotry because it will probably just start a big ugly thread. I just have a problem when misinformation as to the *faith* itself perpetuates. It seemed there was a thought that somehow Catholics had invented the Adam and Eve story as part of some ongoing evil conspiracy to keep women down. Catholics did not write the Old Testament of the bible and weren't even in existence until several thousands years later. As for interpretations of that story, it is interesting that Bob, Lama and myself have all been told a different meaning for it. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 02:44:32 -0400 From: ljirvin@jmdl.com Subject: Today in History: August 26 1969: Joni opens for Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young at the Greek Theater in Los Angeles. More info: http://www.jmdl.com/articles/view.cfm?id=153 - ---- For a comprehensive reference to Joni's appearances, consult Joni Mitchell ~ A Chronology of Appearances: http://www.jonimitchell.com/appearances.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 02:44:32 -0400 From: ljirvin@jmdl.com Subject: Today's Library Links: August 26 On August 26 the following articles were published: 1969: "Joni Mitchell - Crosby, Stills, Etc., Open Run at Greek" - Los Angeles Times (Review - Concert) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/view.cfm?id=153 1997: "Sony/Atv Music Publishing And Joni Mitchell Enter Into Worldwide Agreement" - Business Wire (News Item) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/view.cfm?id=57 ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2003 #422 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe ------- Siquomb, isn't she? (http://www.siquomb.com/siquomb.cfm)