HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:31:21 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Nov. 25

                    Wednesday, November 25, 1992

Revelation 15:1-4             Psalm 98               Luke 21:12-19

                        PRAISE IN PERSECUTION

People "will manhandle and persecute you." --Luke 21:21

"Anyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus can expect to be
persecuted" (II Tim 3:12).  The Lord wants us to expect persecution.  This
expectation prepares and arms us for spiritual warfare (I Pt 4:1).  To help
us expect persecution, the Lord has told us we will be manhandled, persecuted,
arrested, and brought to trial because of out love for Him (Lk 21:12).  We
will "be delivered up" even by our "parents, brothers, relatives, and friends,"
and some of us will be put to death (Lk 21:16).

We often react to the "good news" of persecution with denial, fear, or sadness.
But the Lord wants us to stand erect and hold our heads high (Lk 21:28).  He
wants us to be like Paul and Silas who prayed and sang hymns in the midst of
suffering persecution (Acts 16:25).  Even at the time of the mass apostasy and
as the seven final plagues are poured out on this earth (Rv 15:1), we should be
"full of joy" for having "been judged worthy of ill-treatment for the sake of
the Name" (Acts 5:41).  Under any conditions, we can sing, "Mighty and wonder-
ful are Your works, Lord God Almighty!  Righteous and true are Your ways, O
King of the nations!" (Rv 15:3)  In persecution, we will shout with all the
angels and saints: "Alleluia!  The Lord is King, our God, the Almighty!  Let
us rejoice and be glad, and give Him glory!  For this is the wedding day of
the Lamb" (Rv 19:6-7).  Praise Him always and with special enthusiasm when
you're privileged to be persecuted.


Prayer:  Father, judge me worthy to be persecuted.

Promise: "Since You alone are holy, all nations shall come and worship in
          Your presence."  Rv 15:4

Praise:  As hecklers blasphemed, Gloria continued her rosary march before
         the abortion chamber.
-----
From "One Bread, One Body", reproduced with permission.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:52:51 EST
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2
From:         Evelyn Haller <LIBEM048@SIVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Priest shortage

From: Evelyn Haller
I think the idea of loving our brother or sister and spreading the Lord's
message to all peoples is great. However, discussing the idea of whether of
women priests and perhaps married priests doesn't seem to really solve
anything, just add to another argument.

By the way, I saw on the news last night that the pastoral letter was not
approved by the U.S. churches. Has anyone actually seen this letter?? Do we
get to see it at all??
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 12:15:38 EST
From:         "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support,
              x8425" <tillman@SWDEV.SI.COM>
Subject:      Re: AIDS (was Re: ACT-UP)

Karl Schudt writes:

>Perhaps, but lets look at the facts. We have NEVER EVER EVER cured a virus.
>Never. Not in all of history. Not a one.

I would contend that we have cured both the polio virus and the smallpox virus.
Both diseases *are* viral in nature.

If one wants to be exact, one could claim we can't cure it in someone who *has*
the disease, only prevent people from getting the disease because the vaccine
endows immunity, but by having vaccines for these diseases, we can prevent
others from catching them from carriers *even if they are exposed*.  I would
classify this as a cure, since the diseases can no longer propagate and will end
when the carrier ends.

-----------------------------+--------------------------------
 Brian Tillman               | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com
 Smiths Industries, Inc.     |           tillman_brian@si.com
 4141 Eastern Ave., MS129    | Hey, I said this stuff myself.
 Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it.
-----------------------------+--------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.0.4 1/31/90)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 10:02:57 HST
From:         Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject:      Re: Priest shortage...
              shortage..." (Nov 18,  7:20am)

Ed, at the present time it is my understanding that there are NO
seminarians in the pipeline from the state of HI.  And there is
already a shortage here, too.  I have no problem at all believing what
the TIME article said.

Shalom,                           Len Howard OSL
                                  tas@pegasus.com
From: mfulsmb@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Martin Barry)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re:      Re: Homosexuality
Date: 16 Nov 92 10:42:28 GMT
Organization: Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.

In article <1992Nov12.163106.18767@erenj.com> bdboyle@erenj.com (Bryan D. Boyle) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.145921.23786@cs.tulane.edu> lang@cs.tulane.edu (Raymond Lang) writes:
:
: The Vatican is not identical with the Church.  The Church is the
: entire people of God, and Church leaders have an obligation to
: consider the experience and prayerful conclusions reached by the
: faithful.
:
>Perhaps in some humanistic-centered faiths, but certainly not in the 
>Roman Catholic Church. The infallibility of church teaching does not
>rest with the meanderings of the minds of the faithful, but the
>doctrinal analysis that is arrived at by those qualified and charged
>with the care of the deposit of faith. 

This is a contemptuous attitude towards the body of Christ.

>One of the abuses passed off as issuing forth from Vatican Council II 
>was this thought that the church takes its legitimacy from the consent
>of the "people of God", which is one of the tenets condemned by the
>encyclicals dealing with Modernism...The Church does not derive its
>authority from us...nor does it have to listen to you or me in
>determining its theology or doctrine. 

This is a misrepresentation of the argument. The Pope and the Bishops do not
derive their *authority* from ratification of their pronouncements by the
laity; rather, their role is to articulate the constant faith of the entire
Church, which includes you and me. And crucially, THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHEN
THEY HAVE FAILED, in minor matters. (We Catholics believe that the Church is
protected by the Holy Spirit from that kind of failure in matters essential
to faith or morals.)

This was well understood by John Henry Newman. In his "On consulting the
faithful" he underlines the sense in which the *repository* for the truths
of the faith is the entire Church, rather than Pope or the Curia who might
periodically hand out revised instructions to the obedient and brain-dead
"faithful" (it's ironic that Bryan Boyle uses this term when he means
"laity"). He even refers to a particular controversy (I can't remember what
or when; Arianism? I'll have to go and look it up) during which the
Bishops appeared for a while to hold the heretical position, while Mr
Boyle's "faithful" remained, well, faithful to the truth. Are you going to
tell me that Newman was a liberal? In thrall to a secular agenda?

: The curia doesn't have a lock on truth or the Holy Spirit, you know.
: They've been wrong about things before and they're wrong about some
: things now.

>In your opinion.  Please quantify where they have been inconsistent in
>your view with the deposit of faith, tradition, and consistent doctrine.

Teachings at various times in its history regarding: slavery, usury, the
secular emancipation of women, co-education, gaslighting, rail-travel... and
in certain respects the condemnation of Modernism. To say nothing of
contraception :-)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 13:42:02 EST
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2
From:         Evelyn Haller <LIBEM048@SIVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Priest shortage

From:  Evelyn Haller
       Smithsonian Institution Libraries
Thanks for the info.

                **** TTFN: Ta Ta for Now ****
Evelyn Haller                                      SI Libraries
LIBEM048@SIVM                                 NHB 24mz, MRC 154
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 17 Nov 1992 09:57:39 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Nov 20

                    Friday, November 20, 1992

Revelation 10:8-11          Psalm 119                   Luke 19:45-48

                        THE UNDERGROUND CHURCH

"Jesus entered the temple." --Luke 19:45

On the surface, a church service, i.e. Mass, seems quiet, even tranquil,
reserved, and orderly.  But if you could read the minds of those present,
you probably would be shocked at what's going on behind the scenes, in the
hearts of the people.

In four verses, the Bible mentions seven activities which go on simultaneously
at a church service.

  1) Ejecting (Lk 19:45).  Hopefully, at church we're letting the Lord eject
        sin, unforgiveness, bitterness, resentment, jealousy, fear, etc. from
        our lives.
  2) Trading (Lk 19:45).  We should not try to play "Let's Make a Deal" with
        God.
  3) Praying (Lk 19:46).  God intends a church to be a house of prayer
        (Is 56:7).
  4) Thieving (Lk 19:46).  "How do we rob" God?  "In tithes and in offerings"
        is one way among others of robbing God (Mal 3:8).
  5) Teaching (Lk 19:47).  St. Jerome said: "Ignorance of Scripture is
        ignorance of Christ."
  6) Plotting (Lk 19:47).  Against Jesus by plotting against the members of
        His body.
  7) Listening (Lk 19:48).  To sit at the feet of Jesus and listen to His
        words is the better part (Lk 10:42).

A church service below the surface is like a three-ring circus.  Is what
you're doing at church pleasing the Lord?


Prayer:  Father, may "the reflections and thoughts" of my heart at Mass be
         pleasing to You (Heb 4:12).

Promise: "In the way of Your decrees I rejoice, as much as in all riches."
          Ps 119:14

Praise:  Carol is blind but has eyes of faith.
-----
From "One Bread, One Body", reproduced with permission.
From: MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET (Marty Helgesen)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Priest shortage
Date: 18 Nov 92 22:05:45 GMT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

In article <1992Nov18.193138.2329@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>, bobv@spike.Jpl.Nasa.Gov
(Bob von Buelow) says:
>
<< Stuff deleted>>
>
>BTW, since Episcopal orders are valid, but illicit per Rome, I would be
>interested in seeing a definitive statement from Rome that declares
>female Episcopal orders invalid.  Without that I would not be able to
>accept the 'invalid material' argument.
<<More stuff deleted>>
>--
>Bob von Buelow             Mars Observer Planning and Sequencing Element
>bobv@spike.jpl.nasa.gov          - standard disclaimers apply -

"In the judgement of the Catholic Church, declared by Leo XIII in the
bull _Apostolicas Curae_ of 1896, 'ordinations performed according to
the Anglican rite have been and are completely null and void.'" --
NEW CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA v.1, p.525
-------
Marty Helgesen
Bitnet: mnhcc@cunyvm   Internet: mnhcc@cunyvm.cuny.edu

"Just say know to Gnosticism"
From: fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Separating our kids from public schools
Date: 17 Nov 92 22:01:02 GMT
Organization: CompuData Inc.

ABDWINIG@IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU (Brent Winiger) writes:

>     I'm curious how the rest of you view the public school situation, and if
>the demand for private schools in the rest of the country or world is
>increasing as it is around here.

The demand for private/parochial schools is increasing only for the well to do 
and in the neighborhoods they live. Phila. is now contemplating the shutdown 
of 8 highschools. Many parishes are being strangled by school expenses in 
normal neighborhoods. 

Only in the suburbs is there the demand you speak of as everybody there 
already has a choice. To continue to make elitist schools out of parochial 
schools will seems to be the trend.

fred
-- 
W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     'mans feet have grown/so big 
26 Warren St.   home: fred@icdi10.compu.com  that he/forgets his littleness'
Beverly, NJ. 08010                          		Don Marquis 
609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr
From: pruss@math.ubc.ca (Alexander Pruss)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Contemporary spirituality (Jean Vanier)
Date: 16 Nov 1992 23:42:35 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: galois.math.ubc.ca

My dear sisters and brothers,

A little while ago, Mrs. Rae Stabosz asked about contemporary liberal
Catholic spirituality.  Well, I have found one book which might fit
the bill:
   Jean Vanier, _Do Not Be Afraid_
   Paulist Press 1975.  ISBN 0-8091-1885-8.
   145 pages, soft cover.

Whether Jean Vanier is liberal or not, depends on the definitions.
Certainly his message is liberating, since it is just Christ's
message.  He does quote Jesse Jackson at one point...

The whole thing is very orthodox as far as I can tell, very much deeply
based on the Gospels (with lots of biblical quotes), and it is all really
very wonderful stuff.  Whether it is spirituality strcitly speaking is
another question, but it is certainly very worthwhile to read.

The spirit is much like that of Mother Theresa.  (What I mean is that its
Spirit is the Holy Spirit.)

(I haven't read the book in its entirety yet.  So there may be something
wrong, but I don't think so.)

God keep!

Your brother,
Alex.

p.s. does anyone know if Jean Vanier has published any books since that
	time, or if he is too busy with L'Arche to do that?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: jocallag@bach.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan)
Subject: Re: polls and women priests
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:05:57 GMT

In article <6066@mccuts.uts.mcc.ac.uk> mfulsmb@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Martin Barry) writes:
>The issue is whether the will of God is to be discerned in the faith of the
>ordinary people who make up the Church. It seems to me (well, OK, it seemed
>to John Henry Newman) that it is a gravely distorted view of the nature of
>the Church to suppose that truth is given first to the Pope and Bishops, and
>then handed on by them to the rest of the faithful. In fact it's the other
>way round: the Pope and Bishops articulate that which is believed by the
>larger Church, and are in danger of error if what they teach differs totally
>from it. So if EVERY Christian except the Pope and a few hundred Bishops
>believed something to be a manifestation of the will of God, the first thing
>that should be subjected to scrutiny is whether the leaders of the Church
>might need to think again.

This discussion of Newman is a little short sighted; Newman also taught
1) When we talk of the faith of the Church, we are not talking of what happens
to believed at any particular time, or any particular place.  What is meant
by the faith of the the Church, according to Newman, is what is present always
and everywhere, which finds different dogmatic expression at different times 
and in different places.  So if at a particular time something comes to be
believed by even a large majority of the faithful, the question has to be asked
whether what has come to be believed is in fact an expression of what the
whole Church has held in faith always and everywhere.  Newman held that if
it was not found to be an expression of what was held always and everywhere
it was not part of the faith.  
2) Part of Newman's difficulty with the RC church before his conversion was
that he thought that the RC church under the guidance of the pope had in
fact departed from what was held always and everywhere, and introduced new
beliefs that did not form part of the original deposit of faith held always
and everywhere by the Church.
3) His own conversion to the RC church occurred as a result of his reading
of the Church Father's and the discovery in them of what amounted to an
axiom for determining what the whole Church holds as of the original deposit
of faith, namely "Ubi Roma est, ibi ecclesia est," (Where Rome is, there the
Church is.)  By his own account, constantly reading this, and seeing appeal
made to this by the Church fathers, eliminated the final obstacles to 
joining the RC church, and he converted.

The point is, if we are going to appeal to Newman for our understanding of 
"consulting the faithful" we ought not ignore the whole of what he had to
say about the matter.

Peace,
John


Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: bdboyle@erenj.com (Bryan D. Boyle)
Subject: Re: Cd. Mahony on the new Missal
Organization: Exxon Research and Engineering Co., NJ
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:05:52 GMT

In article <00963D8A.8A48B3C0.22206@swdev.si.com> "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" <tillman@SWDEV.SI.COM> writes:
>Let me repost something:
>
>Bob von Buelow quotes Gordon's post:
>
>>Proposed new translation:               Current version:
>>
>>Our Father in heaven,                   Our Father, who art in heaven,
>>hallowed be your name,                  hallowed by thy name,
>>your kingdom come,                      thy kingdom come,
>>your will be done,                      thy will be done,
>>on earth as in heaven.                  on earth as it is in heaven.
>>Give today our daily bread.             Give us this day our daily bread.
>>Forgive us our sins                     And forgive us our trespasses
>>as we forgive those who sin against us. as we forgive those who trespass
>>Save us from the time of trial          against us.
>>and deliver us from evil.               And lead us not into temptation,
>>For the kingdom, the power, and the     but deliver us from evil.
>>glory are yours
>
>Guess what!  The translation on the *left* has been in use in the Episcopal
>church since the 1978 BCP was authorized.  It's the only one we use at our
>parish.
>

another reason not to use it...


:-) for the humour-impaired.....
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: lang@cs.tulane.edu (Raymond Lang)
Subject: Re: papal electors (was: Re: Church of England & women priests)
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Tulane Univ., New Orleans, LA
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 14:32:12 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-28071]: clones

In article <1992Nov19.155114.21205@news.nd.edu> jocallag@vyasa.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan) writes:
>I was not talking, though certainly my language was open to, about the way in
>which candidates are found.  Rather, I was talking about what actions actually
>confer the office.

I misunderstood what you were talking about.  There are two things going
on here: selection of someone to fill the office, and actually conferring
the office on that person.  You are correct, of course, that a man may
only be made a bishop by means of the imposition of hands by (I think at
least two) other bishops in the sacrament of Holy Orders.  Now, the
episcopacy is the fullness of Holy Orders: you can't go any further
than that; so, as far as the papacy is concerned, if the man selected is
already a bishop, no sacrament is conferred in his installation.

Ray Lang
lang@cs.tulane.edu
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Thursday, 19 Nov 1992 11:12:08 EST
From: Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: RE: Jesus and opinion polls

In article <921119083148.3f20d47b@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM>, URSIC@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM
says:
>
>Steve B.
>I agree that in the passage you quoted, Jesus is saying that unless you
>eatHis flesh and drink His blood, you will not be saved, now where does
>it say this only applies to men? Once again, you are trying to tie all
>the "sins" of the world in with the ordination of women. I have already
>conceded that the first twelve called by the incarnate Christ were male,
>why must we conclude from that, that He will never call a female?
>You know, if I didn't know better, I'd say you were actually trying to
>compare me to Judas:-) ..and speaking of that, the passage indicates that
>Jesus called Judas a "devil", was Judas the incarnate Satan? Butthen again,
>why don't we try to stick to one topic:-) -J.J.

You show a remarkable ability to miss or ignore the point.  Steve was
not directly addressing the question of whether it is possible--note
that the word is "possible" not "desireable"-- to ordain women.  He
was answering the claim that if a large number of Catholics living at
a particular time supported or rejected some idea the Church should
therefore accept or reject that idea.  In the incident in John 6 Jesus
taught doctrine that most of His followers rejected, and rejected so
strongly that they stopped following Him.  Jesus did not go along
with the majority.  He told the truth, no matter how unpopular the
truth was.  That is what the Church must do today.  (That statement
applies to the Church in both senses of the word--the teaching
authority of the Church and the body of believers as a whole.  We
must remain faithful to God's teaching, even when--not "if" but
"when" it is unfashionable, politically incorrect, or whatever
terms the world may apply.
-------
Marty Helgesen
Bitnet: mnhcc@cunyvm   Internet: mnhcc@cunyvm.cuny.edu

"Just say know to Gnosticism"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: jocallag@vyasa.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan)
Subject: Re: papal electors (was: Re: Church of England & women priests)
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 19:18:16 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.143212.28107@cs.tulane.edu> lang@cs.tulane.edu (Raymond Lang) writes:
>In article <1992Nov19.155114.21205@news.nd.edu> jocallag@vyasa.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan) writes:
>>I was not talking, though certainly my language was open to, about the way in
>>which candidates are found.  Rather, I was talking about what actions actually
>>confer the office.
>
>I misunderstood what you were talking about.  There are two things going
>on here: selection of someone to fill the office, and actually conferring
>the office on that person.  You are correct, of course, that a man may
>only be made a bishop by means of the imposition of hands by (I think at
>least two) other bishops in the sacrament of Holy Orders.  Now, the
>episcopacy is the fullness of Holy Orders: you can't go any further
>than that; so, as far as the papacy is concerned, if the man selected is
>already a bishop, no sacrament is conferred in his installation.

Thank you for recognizing my clarification, and giving some of your own.
Here is a further clarification, I did not mean to imply in any fashion
that elevation to the papacy is an additional sacrament.  Though I suppose,
given what Catholics believe about the See of Peter, we must still recognize
that in the installation of a successor to the Chair Peter, that person
receives a specific office over and above the office received by ordinary
consecration to the episcopacy.  But that does not make an additional sacrament.
Peace,
John