The Lizzie Borden Society archive

Forum URL:

1. "C.C.C."
Posted by adminlizzieborden on Jan-8th-02 at 9:29 PM

By kat on Monday, 12/10/2001 - 08:45 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lizzie and her friends she was to meet at Marion,( Holmes, Fraser,Johnston, Remingtons) were all members of the Central Congregational Church.
According to Rebello, pg 64, they all "served on various committees at C.C.C."

Lizzie, in her Inquest testimony, (Pearson, Trial, pg.402) testifies she did not go to Marion when the rest of the girls went because "I had taken the secretaryship and treasurer of our C.E. Society, had the charge, and the roll call was the first Sunday in August, and I felt I must be there and attend to that part of the business,"

After looking up every citation for the C.C.C. in Rebello, it nowhere says that the Christian Endeavor Society is attached to the Church itself, or the Mission.

I thought it might be & wondered if since so many young committee- persons of Lizzie's church were "out-of-town" that summer, she would have been better off taking "roll-call" in Marion! But I can't prove it...

 
By billu on Monday, 12/10/2001 - 12:22 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kat:
"History of the Central Church, Fall River 1842-1905" was written by Mrs. William Carr, Mrs. Eli Thurston and Mrs. Charles J. Holmes. Pages 167 through 178 define the activities of the various Christian Endeavor Societies. There is no mention of Lizzie Borden in this entire 331 page book...
I wonder why?

 
By raystephanson on Monday, 12/10/2001 - 08:56 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the unsolved murders made her declasse (scorned by the decent folk). She dropped out of her activities after the trial.

I once attended a religious college that never listed one of its most famous graduates (around 1910s?). He rejected his religious faith and became an agnostic, and wrote many books.

 
By kat on Monday, 12/10/2001 - 09:53 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
So the C.E.S. was attached to the C.C.C., thanks.
That's Jubb, right?
But Mrs. Holmes was like Lizzie's "godmother"-at least in church activities, and was on calling terms at the Borden home, and stood by her during her trials and tribulations & gave her a "get out of jail free" party at the Holmes' home for Lizzie, June 20, 1893! Why would she leave her out of the book?
Maybe Lizzie was as lazy at Christian Endeavor as she was around the house, and so made no real contribution to the Society. Maybe she just enrolled with all these church groups to see her name on the roll, collecting accolades that she did not deserve...?
Do you think she joined out of boredom, competition with her father, or because she knew she'd eventually need church references down the road when her family came to be found slaughtered?

 
By stefani on Tuesday, 12/11/2001 - 11:59 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow, now that is a concept. If so, it would make the rage-type hatchet killings into a very premeditated act. Years of planning, instead of just a few days or a month. If Lizzie was thinking of killing Andrew and Abby for some time, it helps explain (at least to me) her resolve after the murders and later in life. She would have been quite used to the idea of being a murderer, working out all the mental justifications and those interesting little and big things one must say to oneself in order to get on with things following the acts. It also helps explain why she stayed in town instead of dashing off to Paris to live the infamous life.

How early do you think she first thought of it then? As early as 1890? Or did she fantasize about it as a child?

 
By billu on Tuesday, 12/11/2001 - 01:00 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The book in question was published in 1905. By this date, Lizzie was long out of favor with other church members.

When I wrote that I wondered why Lizzie was left out of the book, it was just a feeble attempt to be arch.

My humor didn't work.

Sorry!

 
By kat on Tuesday, 12/11/2001 - 09:47 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yea, I figured Ray had the right "take" on that ommission...I just picked up a ball & ran! It was Monday Night Football, after all!
Your humor's Fine, mine is weird!

 
By kat on Wednesday, 12/12/2001 - 02:05 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be precise, I did find a reference to Chrisian Endeavor & the C.C.C., Rebello, pg.168-my mistake/overlook.

And to be fair, pg, 11, gives Michael Martins as source, "A Volume of Sentiment". Fall River Historical Society Quarterly Report, vol. 5, No. 5, Winter/1994:2 :
"...The single influence that has changed Lizzie Borden is religion. How it has affected her only God and her pastor know.

The Central Congregational Church is always having new recruits. On one of these occasions Lizzie Borden joined the church. This was in 1885. Lizzie Borden, the church member, devoted herself to Sunday school and other work with great constancy. She was a figure in every department of church activity. All the allied societies of the Central Church--temperance, benevolence, social, etc.--found in her an interested member and one who was always on hand."

-now, to be cynical, and Stef and I have just barely batted this around: what happened "in 1885" that got her interested in church activities? Then we will have looked at this from all angles, taking into account human nature, and the possibility of an abbherent personality...

 
By kat on Thursday, 12/13/2001 - 05:50 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
So I looked at a time-line to see what was going on at the Borden house around 1885...
c. 1883 Abby's 1/2 sister, Sarah marries George Whithead.
July, 1884 Abby Whitehead (Potter) born.
1885 Lizzie joins C.C.C.
1885 Morse visits.
1885 Wm. Almy dies.
--maybe Abby was visiting the Whiteheads frequently at this time, helping her 20 year old 1/2 sister with a new baby?
--possibly Lizzie was jealous, & recognizing these feelings as non-Christian, included herself in church social work to atone? (This may sound odd now-a-days, but back then, we're talking Calvanisn, Methodism, Puritanism).???Any thoughts?

 
By raystephanson on Friday, 12/14/2001 - 06:29 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Born in 1860, Lizzie would be an "old maid" by then. Maybe she sought a happier companionship than found at home? Don't some cynics say that an unhappy marriage encourages a man to spend more time in his office? Didn't this also produce "religious vocations"?

Also, if she was looking for a man, then belonging to it would provide introductions not found at 92 2nd st.

 
By kat on Saturday, 12/15/2001 - 02:13 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
At 25 she was really teetering on the very last brink of Becoming an old maid. There was one "last gasp" left...She was still of child-bearing age, if she was so inclined.
If Lizzie couldn't break an egg as specified by the jail matron, and said that was the 1st thing she set out to do that she could not accomplish, then it seems as if Lizzie WERE resolved to find a "mate" through church socializing, then she would have done so.

 
By kat on Saturday, 12/15/2001 - 09:42 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think it was in Lizzie's nature, by her age, to ever want to trade one man's domininion over her for another's...

 
By raystephanson on Sunday, 12/16/2001 - 07:20 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, "kat" that story about her engagement to a teacher (broken off when the newspapers printed the story) suggests she did want a man then.

Schoolteachers did not have a union to protect them against arbitrary actions then (see the story in Adele Rogers St.John's "Final Verdict" about a teacher hesitant to give witness to a murder). Note that any marriage would, under English law, turn over all her property to her husband; unless there was an enforceable prenuptial agreement (valid then?).

Roman law, in Calif and other former Spanish colonies and Europe, divides marital property down the middle. Remember, it was very common for marriages to be dissolved by disease, death, war, plague, famine, etc. No electric refrigerators before Civil War, etc.

 
By raystephanson on Sunday, 12/16/2001 - 07:24 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A tragedy is not when bad things happen to bad people; it is when a good person does good, yet bad results from it. An old definition?

Lizzie shielded the killer, an illegitimate son of Andrew who was also "touched". Big scandal in a small town! Also a probable heir and claimant; "not guilty by reason of insanity".

So, following Uncle John's advice, she lawyered up. It wasn't her duty to squeal on her "cousin"; she did the right thing by saying "it wasn't Bridget or anyone who worked for Father". (An employee is the likely suspect - see Edward Radin's book.)

 
By kat on Sunday, 12/16/2001 - 10:24 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suppose it's possible she might have wanted a marriage, at least to "fit in" with society and enable her to entertain..and have some status. But status was derived from the male: husband or father--she'd be trading "down" unless she found a man as wealthy as Andrew, and YES, she would be handing over her current and future ASSESTS--that's WHY I don't think she was so inclined. America was flirting with women's rights and agitating at that time for more fair treatment, also in regards to financial concerns.(She may have learned this from her supporters during trial, if she learned anything...) Lizzie may have noticed that in the not-too-distant future, she would not need a dominate "partner" to ensure her standing in the community.
If SHE HAD married, I can see that little arsenic scenerio finally being enacted, sometime down the road...

 
By raystephanson on Monday, 12/17/2001 - 09:14 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
to "kat" - I don't agree with your forecast.
After all the grief from that Trial, she would NEVER even think of getting rid of a husband that way! "Lightning doesn't strike twice."

By the way, what ever happened to drop the Robert Blake & Lizzie the SUV driver from the news?
Do you know who censors and controls the news? Ever hear of the "Association of Editors and Publishers"? Ever read Jim Marrs' "Rule By Secrecy"?

 
By kat on Monday, 12/17/2001 - 10:24 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, if people believe Lizzie tried to ATTEMPT to poison Abby & Andrew, with 3 sworn witnesses that said she tried to buy prussic acid (which could have other uses, but STILL...) then that would imply she had the mind of a poisoner. Poisoner's DON'T STOP.
More Studies In Murder, by Pearson, pg. 31:
"The habitual poisoner does not always kill in order to receive a direct reward in money; sometimes it is to remove a hated person; sometimes MERELY to get rid of a person who ia a cause of expense to the murderer."
--the word "merely", emphasis mine. But you get the point.
-This is not necessarilly what I truly BELIEVE, but is something to think about. Many DO believe strongly in the original poison theory...

 
By kat on Monday, 12/17/2001 - 10:29 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALSO BTW: I was just wondering myself about the Robert Blake "thing". They did have a (I think) Law & Order segment about 3-4 weeks ago on a strangly similiar subject, but since i don't watch that show and I got a phone call 1/2 way through, I missed their fictional "resolution"-but it had to do with his kids--her step-kids, somehow. Did anybody see the ending?

 
By raystephanson on Tuesday, 12/18/2001 - 02:23 pm [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I often watch that interesting drama "ripped from the headlines" (or "revising history"). But sorry, I don't remember the ending. Its a "potato chip" show, you want more, but don't remember much about each.

IF Robt. Blake's wife was a stay-at-home with kids, then it would've looked bad for him. The gun was found dumped a mile away, too far for him to be guilty alone.

 
By kat on Wednesday, 12/19/2001 - 02:19 am [Edit] [Reply] [Msg Link]  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't anybody see that ending?
In the show, I think he thought his kids did it, and was protecting them, and THey thought HE had done it and were protecting him? That's when the phone rang (in real life).
She was supposedly a star-banger-groupie type person--needed a paternity test to get Blake to marry her. So no, she was not a "stay-at-home-mom". I think she was ready to GIVE him the baby, get a lot of money from him for the whole thing, and then split (real life). So the muder may have saved him a bundle paying HER, but he'll end up paying LAWYERS instead...