By Editor: Blessed Quietness Journal: Steve Van Nattan
Since this is our first issue of the journal, I am taking the opportunity to stir up some healthy controversy. I have some material on Pope Joan, but I have seen nothing from other men on the Narrow Way about her. I am convinced there is something to it. I will therefore give you a starting point, and I hope someone will come forward with help in the way of other historic evidences. This is indeed potent stuff, but we need more proofs.
BA Editor, Steve-- Here is the bibliography available to us as far as I can get it. I would be delighted to receive research results from anyone who can find any of these sources in Roman Catholic institutions. Go into these archives wise as serpents and harmless as doves. The bibliography follows:
Historians or monks in fellowship with the Roman Church:
Anastanius Bibliothecarius (Anastasius the Librarian), Liber Pontificalis, Gesta Pontificum Romanorum, 866
Marianus Scotus, Long time monk and finally at abbey of St. Martin of Cologne, Chronicon, 1082 Ended his life in the abbey at Fulda where Joan lived and studied. Chronicon was a history of all known world history, so it is interesting that Joan got his attention in that context.
Godfrey of Viterbo, Liber memoralis, Joan was listed in many of his manuscripts, 1196
Gervase of Tilbury, Otia Imperialia, 1211. He gave just as much detail as Martin of Troppau after him.
Martin of Troppau (Martinus Polonus or Martin the Pole), Chronicon Pontificum et Imperatorum 1278 I have a quote from his work, for anyone interested, regarding Pope Joan.
Ranulph Higdon, English Benedictine chronicler, in Polychroniconab initio mindi usque ad mortem regis Edwardi III. in septem libros dispositum, quoted from the work of Martin of Troppau, circa 1363.
Adam of Usk, an English writer attested to Higdon's reports within forty years after Higdon's death.
Almeric D'Anger, Nomenclature Chronologique des Eveques do Rome, Dedicated to Urban V, Translator-- Richard Ince, 1362
Petrarch, Title unknown, Venice, Italy, Poetry exalting the Popes, included Joan, 1374
Boccaccio, Decameron, In his study of famous women, De Claris Mulieribus, selected Joan to praise, 1375
John Lydgate, Benedictine Monk and associate of Chaucer, Falls of Princes, Joan included, 1430
Martinus Minorita, Herrmannus Januensis, and Herrmannus Gigas, Flores Temporum, 1290
John Huss, In his defense at the council of Constance, 1413, He tried to show that the Church can survive without a Pope by referring to the two years and five months "Joan occupied the see of Rome."
Bartholomew Platina, Vatican Librarian, Lives of the Popes, He included Joan, but he complained about it. This seems to be the first descent at keeping her memory, 1484
Caesar Baronius, Confessor to Pope Clement VIII, Vatican Librarian, His writings, He rejected a Protestant history of the church which included Joan. He claimed that she was neither male nor female, but she was thrown out of hell to bring chaos in the Church. 1607
Alexander Cooke, Colloquy between a papist and a Protestant, Defended Joan's reign, 1610
Father Phillippe Labbe, Collection Generale des Conciles, Claimed that Joan was invented by Huss, Wickliffe, Luther, and Calvin. Martin of Troppau had written his account of Joan one hundred years previous to those Reformers! 1670
point onward, the Pope's historians
Various approaches were used, from claiming that she was a demon, to, she was a satire invented to mock a Pope, to outright denial of the accounts of history. The masterful attack on Joan's existence was launched by:
Father Johann Joseph Ignaz Von Dollinger, Papstfabeln des Mittelalters, Papist Fables of the Middle Ages, 1863. He concluded that Joan was the result of ancient local folk lore in the area of Rome. He dedicated much of his life to destroy the story of Joan. Why? Possibly because Joan was said by some historians to be German, and Dollinger took that a bit personally.
The inscription on the statue of Joan, which early Papists saw as no problem, on the way to the Lateran Chapel, had the inscription, P.P.P.P.P.P. This was so heavy on the historic memory in the 1600s and 1700s that it became a great debate. The early Catholic chronicler, Jean de Mailly, said it stood for, "Patre pater patrum papissae prodito partum." The cryptic use of six "P"s implies that there is a hidden meaning, or that the meaning should be concealed from ordinary folks. The meaning in Latin is clearly that a female Pope gave birth at that point.
That this is possible is very obvious when it is learned that no Pope for many centuries thereafter would pass that way to do Mass at the Lateran. Also the "groping chair" was known history in many of the above bibliography entries, and it did not exist until after Joan's tenure. Dollinger, who dedicated much of his career to destroying Joan's memory, admits that there were in fact TWO groping chairs. Modern Catholic authorities simply assume that Joan did not exist. They have NO way to explain where the two years and five months went, and they give no explanation for the early historians and their bold belief in Joan the Pope.
Do you suppose John Paul II is a queen bee in disguise? The feminist movement ought to consider Joan as a candidate to be exalted. Perhaps Joan could be canonised and become the saint of un-wed mothers.
There you are. That should give some research digger a start. The trick will be to confirm the early reports. No doubt, most of the documents are buried in the Vatican basement, but the truth has a way of getting out. Let me hear from anyone who has any material on this subject. I am working on a pre-supposition of course. I believe the story. It sounds just like the kind of filthy vomit that Mother Whore was belching out on the world during the Dark Ages. In fact, it is not nearly the worst news to come out of Rome since it turned "Holy." Try reading the Shepherd of Hermas if you think Joan's story was racy.