Tom, are you describing High Anglican schools? Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism are two different universes. Diana

From:  Tom Gray <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:  "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
To:  [log in to unmask]
Subject:  Re: Fearing death by water
Date:  Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:26:54 -0700
I don't think that we should go to far in denouncing
Catholic education in this way. The parable of the
mote and the beam applies very well to this. The
public elementary schools that I went to had the best
of progressive policies. Cap guns etc. were forbidden
from the school grounds. I certainly had teachers who
were bullies. There was one male teacher who obviously
enjoyed strapping and bullying children. This was a
very typical school so my experience cannot be out of
the ordinary.

Canadian correspondents on this list can also recall
the residential school scandal. Multiple generations
of Indian children were  taken from their parents and
made subject to physical and sexual abuse. Some of
these schools were run by Roman Catholic orders.
However the Anglican and United Church ran similar
proportions. These churches (especially the United
Church) project themselves as being among the most
progressive and enlightened institutions in society.
They were always telling the rest of us of our moral
failings in dealing with the disadvantaged -- and then
came the residential school scandal.

The United Church has a corporate organization that
allowed it to escape liability. However the Anglican
Church as a whole could be held liable for the
maltreatment of the children in these schools. It
almost went bankrupt. Naturally both of these churches
didn't want to pay compensation and lobbied to have
the general taxpayer to take responsibility. Naturally
these progressive chruches made vociferous apoligies
and were very critical of Canadian society. Naturally
the taxpayer paid the compensation.

--- Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


Carrol my RC experience confirms everything you say.
Catholic theology exists in a different dimension from
catholic praxis. As children in parochial school we
girls had for role models veiled nuns who shaved their
heads and dressed in medieval habits. (We often peeked
under our nun's veil as she strolled the aisles of our
classroom to see her shaved head. There is a trick
with a pencil I'm sure all catholic school kids know
that will lift the veil as she passes by.)

Here's another gem: when a girl was seen wearing
patent-leather shoes a nun would tell her to watch out
for boys who could see up her skirt by looking at
reflections in her shiny shoes. And another: we were
warned not to jump over puddles because boys could see
under our skirts. I could go on and on! We all fasted
during Lent and before communion (apparently food in
the stomach would contaminate the holy wafer), and
self-denial of every sort was encouraged and praised.
Enjoyment was a no-no. Reading fashion magazines or
going to the movies was seen as a first step to
perdition. If I heard the word modesty once I heard it
a million times. I know Eliot would have approved of
encouraging shame among young ladies simply for being

Judging by some of James Joyce's writings on the
subject it's the same in Ireland (many of our nuns
were Irish). The church's grip on Irish mores as I'm
sure you know was a motivating force for his
emigrating. Diana


From:  Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:  "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
<[log in to unmask]>
To:  [log in to unmask]
Subject:  Re: Fearing death by water
Date:  Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:46:29 -0500
Peter Montgomery wrote:
> Nor will you find any such negative teaching in the
Catholic Church.

You will find all sorts of things in the Catholic
Church, and it is
absurd to say otherwise. You have millions of
Catholics who are only
nominal. They got to Mass twice a year, count
themselves as believers,
and don't let it interfere with either their religion
or their morals.
You have millions who exactly fit the pattern Diana
describes. Both of
these groups include large numbers of clergy as well
as laypersons. You
have many whose theological understanding is extremely
and a majority but NOT all of these fit your formula,
but a minority
even of these sophisticates are heavily  invested in
negative teaching.
You have RC members whose thinking can't be
distinguished from that of
the most benighted fundy bible-thumper and you have
members who are more
atheistic than Diderot. You have those committed in
both thought and
practice to libertarian theology and those berserkers
who adhere to opus
dei. There used to be a wonderful priest (Father Joe
Kelley, may his
tribe increase) at the Newman Center on the ISU
campus. The fucking
bishop in Peoria (an opus-dei member) exiled him to a
in western illinois (and even there he increased the
size of the
congregation before dying of lung cance). He has been
followed by two
priests who probably do belong in a mental hospital.
And then you have
RC members whose thought cannot rise beyond the level
of one-line
insulting zingers without content on e-mail lists.


  More photos, more messages, more storage—get 2GB with
Windows Live Hotmail.

Shape Yahoo! in your own image.  Join our Network Research Panel today!

Messenger Café — open for fun 24/7. Hot games, cool activities served daily. Visit now.