HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Argus Consulting, Tucson, AZ
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.4 2/2/92)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 10:15:03 -0700
From:         "Gordon C. Zaft" <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG>
Subject:      Re: infant baptism

[Let me first point out that I know this is a touchy suject and I mean
no offense or disrespect..]
On Dec 17,  3:00pm, Bob Smith wrote:
} Subject: Re: infant baptism
}
} The liturgy committee set the rules for our parish - baptisms at
} two masses on one sunday per month except during lent, baptism prep
} courses required for parents and godparents, firm commitment to
} live up to required commitments, etc etc.

        Ultimately, of course, the 'liturgy committee' does not
run the parish and can advise only.
}
} He challenged me to produce canon lawyers who agree with my reading -
} again he refused to read either document set - I know of and interact
} with, on a regular basis, more than 6 canon lawyers in the DC archdiocese.
} I spoke with some of them and we came to the conclusion that he may think
} it is personal interest rather than pure reading of the documents.
} I have been contacted by a number of folks who now know more about this.
} I am refraining from naming the priest, I am not after scalp or blood,
} I am after conversion to an open mind that can accept a loving God and
} not a God of retribuition.  My GRANDDAUGHTER will be baptized on 10
} January 1992 at a non-regularly scheduled mass.  We have invited our
} families and friends - including the parish at large.  We are expecting
} approximately 350 people last count....normal 1200 mas is 100 max.
} Redskins games cut down on the attendance at that mass.

        I guess I'm a little confused.  You invited 350 people to what
the priest thinks is a private Mass?  Or what?  Confrontation of this
sort is only going to produce lots of hard feelings on both sides.
}
} We will have a celebration, a welcoming into the community, a mass,]
} and I will offer up my prayers for his enlightenment.

        Your prayers are commendable and probably much needed.
}
} Oh, yeah, they were discouraged from running off to get married before t
} the birth of Colleen and have been attending Marriage prep classes since last
} march.  They are scheduled to marry 24 April 93, after attending
} the engaged encounter in feb, the earliest available date.

        If they are getting married in only 5 months, what is the big
hurry to baptize the child?  Is she sickly?  Why not wait?
} The issue is baptizing children who have parents who are not married to each
} other.....I see the return of the bar sinister -signifying a bastard - as
} this pastors mood.  As a descendant of a long line of bastards, I object.
} As a practicing, active RC, I object, as a believer in the Good News, I
} object, as a human, I object.

        Maybe your ancestry makes you overly sensitive?
}-- End of excerpt from Bob Smith



--
* Gordon Zaft     Argus Consulting  4500 E. Sunrise #N-6, Tucson, AZ 85718
* zaft@caritas.cotdazr.org | noao.edu!coyote!caritas!zaft
                 Semper fidelis Christi et Vicarii sui.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:00:04 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Dec. 20

                    Sunday, December 20, 1992
                    Fourth Sunday of Advent

Isaiah 7:10-14                                      Psalm 24
Romans 1:1-7                                        Matthew 1:18-24

             "THE BEST LAID PLANS OF MICE AND MEN"

"When Joseph  awoke he did as the angel of the Lord had directed him."
 --Matthew 1:24

Many of you have Christmas planned.  You're going to go to these parties, see
certain family members and friends, and give these presents.  You expect to
receive a few presents yourself along with some Christmas goodies.  The
Christmas you have planned is about the same as last year's Christmas, with a
few minor variations.  What if Jesus decided to change your Christmas plans
dramatically?  Would you let Him be Lord of your Christmas?

Ahaz had plans about how to avoid destruction by the Assyrians.  Just when
Ahaz had his plans all set, Isaiah told Ahaz to forget his plans and trust
in God alone.  The Lord even promised a dramatic sign to prove Isaiah's
message (Is 7:11).  Ahaz refused to ask for the sign, would not even consider
changing his plans, and was destroyed by the Assyrians.

Joseph planned to divorce Mary quietly because she was pregnant and the baby
was not his (Mt 1:19).  An angel appeared to Joseph in a dream and told him to
change his plans.  He changed his plans and became the foster father of Jesus,
the husband of Mary, and head of he holy Family.

The best Christmases are not when we get our way, but when we change our plans
and Jesus gets His way.


Prayer:  Father, ruin any plans of mine that are not Yours.

Promise: "The virgin shall be with Child, and bear a Son, and shall name Him
          Immanuel."  Is 7:14

Praise:  Her parents' plans were changed when Christine was born prematurely,
         on Christmas.
-----
From "One Bread, One Body", reproduced with permission.
Nihil Obstat: Rev. Edward J. Gratsch
Imprimatur:  +Most Rev. James H. Garland, V.G.
              Archdiocese of Cincinnati, August 17, 1992.
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Wednesday, 16 Dec 1992 17:12:26 EST
From: Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: RE: Myth exposed!!!

In article <921216085948.2020c6ba@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM>, URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
says:
>
>From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC%CUNYVM.BITNET@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU>
>>1. ....it is impossible for a woman priest to exist ....
>
>>2. ....women can not be ordained .....
>
>>3. ....it is impossible to ordain a woman ......
>
>Three times Marty denies womam's ordination, does this sound familiar
>to anyone? :-) - J.J.

Thank you.

Incidentally, I suggest you stay off that foot for a while until it heals.

-------
Marty Helgesen
Bitnet: mnhcc@cunyvm   Internet: mnhcc@cunyvm.cuny.edu

"Experience beats in vain upon a congenital progressive."
        --  C. S. Lewis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 15:56:01 MST
From:         Brent Winiger <ABDWINIG@IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Queens school board

On Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:54:31 EST Jim McIntosh said:
>On Mon, 14 Dec 1992 13:21:20 PST J Scott Berg said:
>>I think your paragraph starts to focus in on the problem.  "Separation
>>of Church and State" is not what's happening in our government.  It's
>>becoming state-sponsored atheism.
>
>It's hard to say there's state-sponsored atheism when every piece of
>money in your pocket says "In God We Trust".

Jim, how much longer do you really think that phrase will be on our coinage?
I've read several places now that several groups have it on their agenda to
get it removed.

>Senate comes into session they start with a prayer by one of their
>chaplains. Every session of the Supreme Court starts with a plea for God
>to bless this country "and this honorable court."

At least one lower Court has lost in a higher Court the case to make those
prayers.  - Again Jim, its just a matter of time....


> You DON'T see crosses on public property erected with taxpayer dollars.


Or even with non-taxpayers dollars!


> You DON'T see taxpayer money going towards private schools
>dedicated to the furthering of one particular religion's faith.


Or even to help disadvantaged kids learn to read who are discriminated against
because they are attending a religious school.


>
>I understand that with the federal budget measured in the trillions of
>dollars, it is natural to want to grab part of it and use those tax
>dollars for the promotion of your particular church. It'd sure make
>running those schools or raising those crosses easier than if you
>actually had to pay for them yourselves.
>

Thats uncharacteristically unfair of you Jim.  Most of the complaints
aren't about lack of receiving money, but rather about having our kids
indoctrinated with anti-Christian values, and being discriminated against.


>When I look at the mess in Europe or the middle East, though, I am
>continually amazed at the vision of our founding parents. The idea that
>religion could be separated from government has produced a country which
>is amazingly free from religious strife. It is a country where people of
>different faiths can worship side by side without trying to kill each
>other.  That's something that we should value in today's world, and
>not criticize lightly.

I haven't seen anything in any of the Founding Fathers writings to indicate
they wanted to completely remove all religious references from public life as
we are seeing now.  There is no separation of Church and State clause in the
Constitution.  In fact, most of the Founding Fathers felt that a society could
not survive in the absence of religious values.
     We aren't criticizing lightly Jim.  The values or lack thereof that our
society buys into now, will have incredibly serious consequences in the next
several years.  We are already seeing the results of that drift in the
social problems of America today.


Brent
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:39:46 -0500
Reply-To:     esler@apollo.hp.com
From:         esler@APOLLO.HP.COM
Subject:      Re: Queens school board

Jim McIntosh writes:

    > dollars. You DON'T see taxpayer money going towards private schools
    > dedicated to the furthering of one particular religion's faith.

Personally, I believe it is unjust that a person who wishes to educate
his children at a Catholic school, gets none of his tax dollars
directed toward that education.

I believe the Australian model is more just; in that country, the
State does provide aid directly to most private schools, according to
need.  This situation was brought about during the 60's after much
wrangling on both sides.  Ultimately, the issue was forced when the
Catholic schools, which happened to be educating a large slice of
population, went on strike.  The Government realised it couldn't cope
without the Catholic school system, and State Aid was introduced.

I think that a voucher system might be even better than the
Australian setup.

--
Kevin Esler //hewlett-packard/cso/stg/std/clo/mll (MA Language Lab)
esler@apollo.hp.com   (508) 436-5979
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: jocallag@bach.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan)
Subject: Re:      Re: Moral Activity (was Re: Asylum)
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:47:18 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.223946.24953@u.washington.edu> mjsmith@cac.washington.edu (Martha Smith ) writes:
>In article <921215160006.2020bfba@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM>,         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM writes:
>|> john ocallaghan <jocallag@DARWIN.HELIOS.ND.EDU> writes:
>|> >Do we or do we not have laws prohibiting murder, theft, and rape, all of
>|> >which seem to be matters of morality and values.  How do laws designed to
>|> >prohibit abortion differ significantly in intention from these laws?
>|> 
>But remember it is only recently that rape laws have been applied to spousal rape or date rape, yet such actions have always been morally wrong.  And why don't our murder/theft/rape laws apply in time of warfare?  My point is neither in favor nor opposed to laws prohibiting abortion, it is that laws do not solve the problem.  Therefore, we need to consciously decide how best to expend our energy towards stopping abortion and changing the law MAY not be the most effective means.

Now given the fact that rape laws have only recently been applied to spousal
rape, do you think such extension to these situations is a good thing?
Or given the fact that it seems unlikely that such extension will stop those
men who were previously likely to rape their wives fro doing it now, do you
consider such an extension a waste of energy?  After all the problem of
marital rape is also a moral and social problem, and their might be other more
fruitful ways of changing our society in such ways that would be practically
more effective in stopping it.

On the side, I have to say that I resent a little bit what seems to be the
hidden assumption of a lot of people here that those of us who favor legislationprohibiting abortion do not care to do anything else socially to try to stop
the demand.  Maybe were just more energetic than most.  But I am somewhat
offended by the constant assumption that because I favor laws outlawing 
abortion I do not care about women, I have not and do not intend to do anything
to help women who find themselveds in very difficult situations, etc. etc..
By saying this I do not mean to be malicious.  I just ask all of you out
there who have been writing on this topic whether or not after a while your
implicit assumptions might not be somewhat offensive to some of us who
favor legislation.

Peace,
and Happy Advent.
John
P.S.  I have and will continue to try to avoid such assumptions myself; and
I realize none of us is perfect and can always and completely avoid such 
assumptions.

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 11:31:20 MST
From:         Brent Winiger <ABDWINIG@IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Queens school board
              2 Dec 1992 17:49:57 GMT from
              <J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@DARTMOUTH.EDU>

On Wed, 2 Dec 1992 17:49:57 GMT J. Theodore Schuerzinger said:
>I noticed a headline in the NY Times today saying that a school board
>in Queens was suspended for not agreeing to a new curriculum (if I'm
>not mistaken) that states, among other things, that first graders are
>to be taught that homosexuals should be respected.

>immediately calling us 'homophobic', and if we didn't have
>this stuff virtually rammed down our throats (I thought school boards
>were supposed to represent the interests of the local parents).
>
I just read the paper this morning Ted.  It had another article about that
situation.  It seems that the school board was elected in a popular vote.  The
school board felt that it was representing the wishes of its constituents
(parents) and voted not toimplement the "Rainbow Curriculum", which among other
things uses the book "Heather Has Two Mommies" in the first grade.  According
to the article, the curriculum teaches about anal sex IN FIRST GRADE!!!! and
several other controversial topics.
   The first frightening element is that the guy who is pushing this
curriculum is purported to be Clinton's appointment as Secretary of Education.
The second frightening thing, is that a Chancellor can fire a whole School
Board that has been democratically elected, because he feels that he knows
better what is right for the kids than do the parents.
   This is just one more example of people with traditional Christian values
having their rights trampled by the elements of society who want to remove
every last bastion of those values from society.  Is there someone on this
list who can tell us how the parents of the area are reacting to this?

>--Ted Schuerzinger
>email: .zed@Dartmouth.EDU
Brent Winiger
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 08:49:42 EST
From:         "Donald J. Magee" <djm@TRENT.ATT.COM>
Subject:      Re: When will the new RC catechism be released in English?
              92 8:03 pm

>
> In article <1992Dec16.172236.3713@news.cs.indiana.edu> azamora@cs.indiana.edu
> writes:
> >Does anybody know when the new Roman Catholic catechism will be released in
> >English?  I called the local parish, and they didn't have any information.
>
>    Some time in the Spring of 1993.  It still has to be translated.
>
> -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -
> Steve Creps, Indiana University
> creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
>

Not desiring to rehash a possibly old topic *or* start any flame
throwing arguements, but does anyone have any comments on the wisdom
of the Universal Cathecism being written in French then translated to
English, German, Spanish, Latin(?), etc.  I like the security of being
able to look at the original Latin documents for the *official*
untranslated teaching.  It would seem to me that it would have been
best to use Latin, and keep the language the same as the bulk of the
other documents.  Just wondering how people felt.

Don Magee
trent!djm@jolt.att.com
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: mjsmith@cac.washington.edu (Martha Smith )
Subject: lay associates to holy orders
Organization: UW Computing
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:30:18 GMT

The Sisters of the Holy Family (Bay area) have a program of lay associates (both
 genders) who go through a year's formation (phone calls/ weekends etc) and then
 make commitments (for a year at a time, I believe) to religious service. 
 During that year the associates maintain certain ties to the community of
 professed sisters.  It is an interesting blend of lay and religious life - very
 appropriate to our time, I believe. Does anyone know of other similar programs?
From: J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: electronic bible
Date: 12 Dec 92 18:24:37 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0b1@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <Bz4F0K.9Mt@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
tpe36878@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Harry Connick Jr. ) writes:
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> 		In His name,

Is that in God's name or in Harry Connick Jr.'s name?  :-)

--Ted Schuerzinger
email: .zed@Dartmouth.EDU
"Den Glaubenden gehoert die Ewigkeit."
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Thursday, 17 Dec 1992 09:28:26 EST
From: Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Queens School Board

Doug Marlette is an editorial cartoonist.  (He also draws the strip
Kudzu.)  His editorial cartoons tend to express liberal views that I
disagree with, but he drew an excellent cartoon about the "Children
of the Rainbow" curriculum.  It shows two small children.  One says,
"Heather has two mommies."  The other replies, "How many is two?"

Someone posted recently that his newspaper had not said anything
about teaching small children about anal sex in reporting on the
"Children of the Rainbow curriculum.  He might want to take that  up
with the editor of his local newspaper, because that is a part of the
curriculum.  On another list Michael Kline has been posting his tran-
scriptions of a discussion of the issue on the 700 Club.  Part of the
discussion was Pat Robertson interviewing a woman who lives in the
Queens school district, Dolores Ayling founder of Concerned Parents
for Educational Accountability:

   Pat: What's this going to do to America if happens in New York? If
they impose it upon the parents of New York?

    Dolores: It's not only happening in New York, it's happening in 7
other states also, because I've been getting phone calls from 7 other
states. And, if it happens in New York, I agree with Michael Faulkner, it
will spread across the country. And, I believe this is a homosexual
agenda to introduce their lifestyle in the formative years of our
children.

    But there's more to this curriculum just than homosexuality. It's sex
period, because on page 379 of the curriculum, there's a directive to
teachers that tells the teachers ways you can get AIDS from sexually.
They talk about oral, and anal, and vaginal sex.

    Pat: Wait a minute, TO FIRST GRADERS?!?! (D: Yes.) Oral, and anal,
and vaginal SEX? (D: That's the view.) Most people don't know what this
is all about.

    Dolores: I know that. In this page, 381, it tells the teacher
that if her class is mature enough, she can tell them the specific ways
that this disease is transmitted sexually. That would include the
references made on 379, oral, anal, and vaginal sex.

<stuff omitted>

    Pat: There's no doubt about that. Tell me, Dolores, where can
somebody get in touch with you?

    Dolores: If they want to contact me at Concerned Parents, it's PO
Box 340010, Brooklyn, New York 11234. And the phone number is 718
891-2582.

-------
Marty Helgesen
Bitnet: mnhcc@cunyvm   Internet: mnhcc@cunyvm.cuny.edu

"Experience beats in vain upon a congenital progressive."
        --  C. S. Lewis
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: met48546@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Marc E. Talbot)
Subject: Re: Abortion
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:42:46 GMT

"Gordon C. Zaft" <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG> writes:

>The anti-lifers seek to deprive of life and limb people who would
>potentially be my spouse, son/daughter-in-law, priest, doctor, lawyer,
>researcher who cures the common cold/cancer/AIDS, etc.  Furthermore,
>it's possible I could be deprived of a grandchild due to their efforts
>(this is all hypothetical for now, I'm not married).
>        Beyond the wanton destruction of innocent life is the cheapening
>of the value of life, the oppression of women, and the anti-lifers'
>attempt to impose their moral view on me.

One could argue that you would be deprived of a grandchild because your
daughter chooses to have an abortion, not because she has that right.  If
I shoot someone, they die because I shot them, not because guns are legal
(my, what a gruesome example - and probably a whole new can of worms as
well...).

Marc

>        Their moral view is, of course, that one cannot impose one's
>moral views on others.  A bit of a contradiction, that.

>GZ

>--
>* Gordon Zaft     Argus Consulting  4500 E. Sunrise #N-6, Tucson, AZ 85718
>* zaft@caritas.cotdazr.org | noao.edu!coyote!caritas!zaft
>                 Semper fidelis Christi et Vicarii sui.
From: elendil@seashell.mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Asylum (sanctuary)
Date: 6 Dec 92 13:22:59 GMT
Organization: Seashell Software

norris@athena.mit.edu (Richard A Chonak) writes:

> Please note that John (above) doesn't accuse Op Rescue of doing violence; if
> read him right, he's only speaking in general terms about what type of "direc
> action" he approves of / disapproves of.
>
> Speaking for what I've seen on numerous occasions, OR Boston has a solid reco
> following Operation Rescue's principles of non-violent action.

Hmmm...shame that other OR rescues in this country don't follow 'principles of
non-violent action.'  Nothing like a video of an OR activist minister
assaulting women in front of a clinic (as happened in Baton Rouge, LA) to shoot
down that concept...

>
> |> To Steve Barr:  Based on John's recounting of this event, it looks like th
> |> Church in Boston is very much participating in political activity.  Grante
> |> cause is good *this time*, but a prohibition should be a prohibition, lest
> |> Church be viewed as hypocritical.
>
> First, church law forbids priests from holding public or party office.  That'
> that's prohibited.  Other kinds of political activity (e.g., leading a
> demonstration or heading a lobbying group) are open to Catholic priests.

See several other repsonses for my feelings on this.

>
> Second, I hope you're not suggesting that we Catholics (including bishops and
> priests) don't have a right to protest when we have a grievance against some
> public official!
>
> Finally, was John even -reporting- anything that the Church *did*?  It sounds
> he's just relating what people (e.g., the pro-abort Attorney General) *claime
> the Church was going to do.

Again, see my other responses.

>
> [Sorry to use up bandwidth with this topic, but I felt it's not right to let
>  a misleading statement about OR pass.]
>
> -_RC

Based on direct observation of OR in this part of the country, my statements
are *not* misleading.



|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU