At 04:37 PM 1/9/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Dear listmembers,
>
>A colleague of mine, Jane Schulenburg [who knows she ought to join this
>list, but hasn't done so yet], is trying to track down a reference she heard
>in a conference paper some time back. It's a statement to the effect that a
>woman who has borne children in the ordinary biological way cannot be
>considered a serious candidate for sainthood, and supposedly comes from the
>documents compiled in connection with the [unsuccessful] case that was made
>in the 16th [or 17th?] century for canonizing Thomas More's oldest daughter,
>Margaret More Roper.
I'd be very interested if anyone can track do wn that reference & share it
with us on this list.
Thanks
Mark Lodico
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|