HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ajpg1322@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Angelo J. Paguia)
Subject: Re: Devotion to Mary
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 02:42:16 GMT

lhh@LCUXLP.ATT.COM writes:

>I have a copy of the book "True Devotion To Mary" by St. Louis DeMontfort
>(TAN publishing).
>Does anyone have experience with this book, I wonder if its
>really meant for "nonbeginners" in the Christian life ?
>Is this mainstream, or way out in left field ?

>                        Thanks,
>                        Len Horn
>                        lcuxlp!lhh

I just got a book entitled "The Glories of Mary" by St. Alphonsus
Liguori (can't beat that!) that is quite a thick pocketbook for about
$10. Inside is a collection of some of the most interesting items of
revelation to other saints and understanding by St. Liguori of the
Blessed Mother. I highly recommend it. It is available, at least, at
the Daughters of St. Paul bookstore.

Peace,
Angelo

-For on this day, a child was born, that gave his life that we may
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 10:30:35 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Re: Moral Activity (was Re: Asylum)

john ocallaghan <jocallag@DARWIN.HELIOS.ND.EDU> writes:
>I don't think your analogy to organ transplants works.

The only point I was trying to make was that simply because an object
is genetically different, does not mean that it is a "separate" person,
let alone, a "legal" person.

>What would you say constitutes a living individual, if not that its
>development and action is in some sense self directed?

Ok, a sperm cell is a living individual, but that by itself does not
make it a "legal" person.

>What criterion can you give for saying that the mother is an individual?
>Maybe I just don't know what you mean by an individual.

Yes, somehow we have gone from your original question to a biology free-
for-all:-)

>As a matter of fact, it is still part of the mother's biological system.
                         ^^
Tell this to Steve:-)

>  But so long as she is regularly lactating, she
>also remains naturally infertile; and when she no longer lactates regularly
>she will begin to ovulate.

I've also heard that this is a "myth", or at least not "reliable".
Maybe Len could shed some light on this.

>There are more ways in which neither mother nor child are independent
>bilogical "units" in what appears to be your sense.  My wife could list them.
>But I think you get the picture.

Yes, you've "beat it into this congenital progressive" enough:-)

But back to my original answer to your original question. My claim is that
the difference in murder, rape, and theft laws is that they protect already
"existing" legal persons, whereas an anti-abortion law would first have to
declare fetuses legal persons. At least I think you were originally asking
for a difference:-) -J.J.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: The American University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:54:31 EST
From:         Jim McIntosh <JIM@AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Queens school board
              14 Dec 1992 13:21:20 PST from <ALHY@SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>

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.  When you refuse to allow anything
>that has any relationship to religion into a government-related
>activity, the government therefore is making a choice when it comes to
>religion (more broadly, belief systems).  It says that any belief
>system which does not acknowledge God as one of its tenets is
>preferred in government institutions.  That is NOT separation of
>church and state in my opinion.

It's hard to say there's state-sponsored atheism when every piece of
money in your pocket says "In God We Trust". Everytime the House or
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." I think every speach
I've heard the present president give ended with "And may God bless the
United States of America."

What you DON'T have is government sponsorship of any particular religion
or sect. You DON'T see crosses on public property erected with taxpayer
dollars. You DON'T see taxpayer money going towards private schools
dedicated to the furthering of one particular religion's faith.

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.

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.

Jim McIntosh, SFO (jim@american.edu)
The American University
Washington DC 20016-8019 USA
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:41:46 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Dec. 19

                    Saturday, December 19, 1992

Judges 13:2-7, 24-25       Psalm 71             Luke 1:5-25

                        FRUIT FOR CHRISTMAS

"His wife was barren and had borne no children." --Judges 13:2

Today the Church introduces us to the mother of Samson and to Elizabeth, the
mother of John the Baptizer.  Both of these women were barren, but the Lord
miraculously made them fruitful.  Are you barren, not physically, but
spiritually?  How many people have you helped lead to Christ this Advent?
How many spiritual children have you begotten in the last couple of years
(see Phim 10; I Cor 4:15)?  With how many people have you tried to share
your faith?  How many seeds of the gospel have you planted?

Many of us have been barren.  We need the miracle mentioned in today's
readings.  We need to be made fruitful.  If we don't share our faith in
Jesus, do we have faith in Jesus?  If we don't let others know that Jesus
loves them, do we love them?  If we haven't given others the opportunity
to know Christ, how can they have Christ-mas?  Jesus taught: "I am the
Vine, you are the branches.  He who lives in Me and I in him, will produce
abundantly" (Jn 15:5).  Be fruitful and multiply (Gn 1:28).


Prayer:  Father, may I give up my life to bear fruit abundantly (Jn 12:24).

Promise: "In these days the Lord is acting on my behalf;  He has seen fit to
          remove my reproach among men." --Lk 1:25

Praise:  Nancy shares her faith at the bus stop.
-----
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.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: 15942@brahms.udel.edu (Stephen Barr)
Subject: Re: Asylum (sanctuary)
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:04:18 GMT

    I am afraid there is little to be done for this
courageous priest. But we should try to publicize what 
is being done to him, so that his sacrifice may bear
as much fruit as possible. And we should pray for him
and his persecutors.

    To Ed I would make two comments. What this priest is
doing is not a matter of politics in a partisan sense.
No one has forbidden priests to engage in moral witness.
For the clergy to get involved in electoral politics in
a direct way would undermine their moral authority. 
For example, the most effective way to advance the prolife
cause would be for Catholics to vote Republican en bloc.
But obviously the bishops could not urge that without a
disastrous effect on their credibility.
    Unfortunately the only priest who was in Congress,
and who was then told not to seek reelection by the Vatican,
was Fr. Drinan. He voted consistently "pro choice" on
abortion.      Steve.
    
     John Covert, could you tell us the name of this priest,
and some details about this affair? Steve.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:26:44 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Dec. 18

                    Friday, December 18, 1992

Jeremiah 23:5-8             Psalm 72            Matthew 1:18-24

                  AN INCONCEIVABLE CHRISTMAS

"When his mother Mary was engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together,
 she was found with child through the power of the Holy Spirit." --Matthew 1:18

The Bible makes it clear that Jesus was born of a virgin (see also Mt 1:25).
He did not have a human father. He was not conceived through sexual relations.
His conception was miraculous and scientifically unexplainable.  Jesus
transcends our human intelligence.  He does not contradict our minds, but
transcends them.

To prepare for Christ's Christmas coming, we must not screen God's work through
the peephole of our own intelligence.  The Lord commands: "Trust in the Lord
with all your heart, on your own intelligence rely not" (Prv 3:5).  As high
as the heavens are above the earth, so high are His ways above the earth, so
high are His ways above your ways and His thought above your thoughts
(Is 55:9).  "Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it so much as
dawned on man what God has prepared for those who love Him" (I Cor 2:9).

This is our God.  This is the Christ of Christmas -- transcendent, almighty,
glorious, all-holy, Jesus Christ "is the blessed and only Ruler, the King
of kings and Lord of lords Who alone has immortality and Who dwells in
unapproachable light, Whom no human being has ever seen or can see.  To Him
be honor and everlasting rule!  Amen" (I Tm 6:15-16).


Prayer:  Father, during this last week of Advent and the Christmas season,
         may I let You do more than I can ever ask for or imagine (Eph 3:20).

Promise: "I will raise up a righteous Shoot to David; as King He shall reign
          and govern wisely, He shall do what is just and right in the land."
          --Jer 23:5

Praise:  Amy spent $20 instead of $300 on gifts this year.  She sent $280
         to feed the starving.
-----
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.
From: amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Asylum (sanctuary)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:00:09 -0500
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation
Distribution: world
Reply-To: amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
NNTP-Posting-Host: chaos.intercon.com
X-Newsreader: InterCon TCP/Connect II 1.1fc2

In article <9212171509.AA26003@enet-gw.pa.dec.com>, "John R. Covert 17-Dec-
1992 1003" <covert@COVERT.ENET.DEC.COM> writes:
> Amanda is probably unaware that Vatican II defined the primacy of the 
> Pope in terms of collegiality rather than allegiance or obedience, 
> which, if the interpretation of this moves in the direction that some 
> (but not all) would like to see, could actually become a basis for the 
> kind of "first among equals" that Orthodox and Anglicans would like to 
> see for reunification of the three branches of the Catholic Church. 

I'm aware of the Vatican II view of the primacy of the Pope, but I am unaware 
that it has in fact been accepted by the Catholic hierachy.  As you note, 
it's one of the things that is promising about Vatican II to Anglicans and 
Orthodox, including me.  However, since Vatican II my impression is that the 
Catholic Church has backed away from this view, at least to some extent.



Amanda Walker
InterCon Systems Corporation
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Clergy Trial Update
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 01:33:23 CST
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home) writes:

> 2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA (Andy) writes:
>
> > Review Ordered in Bishop's sex case (9 December):
> >Vanouver (Canadian Press)- The BC government has appointed a special
> >prosecutor to review the case of a Roman Catholic bishop whose sex trial end
> >abruptly Monday because of legal technicalities.
>
> Besides him and the ex-Archbishop of Atlanta, I wonder how many others have
> had their story covered up by us paying the price at the collection plate.
> These people obviously see nothing wrong in accepting the role of Bishop in
> sanctimonious fashion.  They played the game well.

Fred, I'd also lump the bishops who are covering up the behavior of priests in
their dioceses in with the ones who actually have committed sexual misconduct.
They're actually worse in my book, because they could have done something to
help the victims and ignored them.



|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
X-Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:18:03 EST
Reply-To:     tfm+Catholic@CS.CMU.EDU
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was
              Thomas_McGinnis@SEGNO.SOAR.CS.CMU.EDU
From:         Thomas McGinnis <tfm+Catholic@CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Scapular

[Apologies if you see this twice, a couple of days apart. However, if
 you *did* see this article a day or so ago, would you please drop me
 a note? (I'm trying to find out where the NetNews propogation of my
 posts to this group is fouling up....) Thanks -- TFMcG]


 Speaking of scapulars, there was a film in the last 10 years or so which
(if I remember correctly) dealt with four fellows in a sort of waiting
room. They determine that they are in Purgatory, and spend the film
recalling their childhood together, trying to figure out what sin they
committed in common that has brought them back together in that state.


 ->If anyone knows the film I'm talking about, and can tell me its name<-
 ->and whether it is available on video, I'd greatly appreciate it!<-


 Anyway, among the numerous, humorous recollections is the following:

 (Scene: Sister Mary-someone, instructing the communion class)

 STUDENT: Sister, can you tell me the difference between the green
          scapular and the brown scapular?
 SISTER:  A fine question. Well, if you are wearing a green scapular
          at the moment of your death, you will be absolved from all
          venial sins you have committed. But, if you are wearing the
          brown scapular, you will be absolved from both venial and
          mortal sins.
 STUDENT: I see.
 SISTER:  So, I'm sure you'll all agree that the brown scapular is worth
          the extra 50 cents....

 :-)

Pax et Bonum,
Tom.
--
Thomas F. McGinnis                                     tfm+Catholic@cs.cmu.edu
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891
Any opinions are mine except where noted, and not necessarily those of CMU.
spes mea in Deo                               nunc scripsi totum da mihi potum
From: elendil@seashell.mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Asylum
Date: 6 Dec 92 13:16:19 GMT
Organization: Seashell Software

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

> On Dec 4,  7:48pm, "Edward J. Branley" wrote:
> } Subject: Re: Asylum (sanctuary)
> } You know, I remember when priests were allowed to hold political offices in
> } this country, until the Pope forbade it.  Now we have priests engaging in
> } obvious political activity in terms of the pro-life movement.  I can't help
>  but
> } wonder whether or not a few priests in Congress would have been more useful
> } than a few priests in jail.
> }-- End of excerpt from "Edward J. Branley"
>
> Ed,
>         It's not *political* activity, it's *moral* activity.  There is
> a very big difference.  That difference is part of the reason NOW hasn't
> yet succeeded in taking away our tax exemption (though sometimes I
> think we'd be better off if we DIDN'T have it).
>
> 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.


Six of one, half a dozen of another, when it comes to abortion.



|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: 75furlong@cua.edu
Subject: Re: Feminine language referring to God
Organization: The Catholic University of America
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 02:14:32 GMT

In article <92Dec8.203752est.12089@roll.db.toronto.edu>, jdd@db.toronto.edu (John DiMarco) writes:

> God is warrior, God is lover. Jesus calls God "Father, Abba (i.e. Daddy)",

I'm confused - can women not be warriors or lovers? This does not seem to me to
be uniquely "masculine" imagery....

Just looking for clarification...
-Alison
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 17:20:13 CST
From: <U14663@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: For those who think there's no bias....
 <92Dec8.195841est.12089@roll.db.toronto.edu>

In article <92Dec8.195841est.12089@roll.db.toronto.edu>, jdd@db.toronto.edu
(John DiMarco) says:
>
>awerling@NMSU.EDU (WERLING) writes:
>
>>To bring it more personal, if you were to tell me that you love me but you
>>hate my homosexuality (I am homosexual without ever having sex...meaning
>>it's more than just an "action"), well, that sounds more like hatred than
>>love to me.
>
>The church believes homosexual acts are spiritually harmful, in that they
>put one in opposition to God's will (that's what sin is, after all). If
>A loves B, and B is prone to a particular harmful thing, shouldn't A's love
>for B try to help B avoid the harmful thing?
>
>You see, there are two issues here. One is the question of fact: are
>homosexual
>acts sinful (i.e. spiritually harmful as described above)? The second is a
>question of love: given that one loves someone who is homosexual, what is
>the most loving response to the question of homosexual acts? If the answer
>to the first question is "yes", the answer to the second question must be
>"to discourage them as much as possible" if the love is truly genuine.
Yes, but if the answer to the first question is "no", and that is the
conclusion many, both those whose sexual orientation (genetic
disposition) is homosexual and those whose sexual orientation is
heterosexual, have made, the most loving response to the question of
homosexual acts to "engage in them in a loving way just as,
anatomical constraints permitting, heterosexual couples do."
>
Peace,
Dick Murphy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.0.4 1/31/90)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1992 17:06:57 HST
From:         Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject:      Re: Moral Activity (was Re: Asylum)
              (was Re: Asylum)" (Dec 20,  9:33pm)

John, the physical findings in the first three months after childbirth
would reduce  efficacy of NFP methodology.  The cervical mucus is
different as the cervix heals, and there is much distortion of the
uterus itself, both in position and shape.  After a time, and some
exercise, the anatomic situation will return to near what it was
before the pregnancy, and the NFP method can again be used.

Re Abortion.  John, I think I am really just expressing my frustration
about having to still deal with the problem of abortion and the
ensuing debate.  It can never by any stretch of the imagination be
construed as "good".  It is always evil.  The only concern is that
sometimes it might be the lesser of two evils.  I certainly do not
wish to make this horrific decision for anyone else.  I don't do
abortions in my practice, but I do take care of women who have had
them done by another physician.  That is the essence of our group
practice.  So I see abortion as a continuing problem.  I merely
express the personal fatigue with dealing with its many ramifications.
Abortion is the end of the chain, and the root causes are manifold.
There are so many societal problems to be solved before we can even
think of eliminating abortion.  I apologize for my expression of
personal frustration, John.  I am glad that there are others who will
pick up the gauntlet.  But we have to battle the whole enemy, not just
the end result.

Shalom, John, and have a Blessed Christmas Season.        Len Howard
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: The American University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sun, 20 Dec 1992 22:25:45 EST
From:         Jim McIntosh <JIM@AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Asylum (sanctuary)

Last Thursday Bryan made an excellent point in this debate:
> Give me a break.  The government and people of the united states do not
> set the rules for who we look to for spiritual direction and advice, nor
> do we pledge fealty to the Pope.  Nor do the bishops, priests,
> cardinals, even the Jesuits.  I would dare say that the Church that was
> founded by Jesus Christ is a higher authority than whatever corrupt,
> venal method of government we have today.  If push came to shove, I
> would trust my eternal happiness to the Church rather than our
> government.

Bryan has an excellent point. We owe our obedience to a foreign power,
but I would argue that it's not Rome. It is the Kingdom of God. While we
give to Caesar what is Caesar's, we cannot give our minds, our
consciences, or our unquestioning obedience. We have dedicated those to a
higher authority.

Jim McIntosh, SFO (jim@american.edu)
The American University
Washington DC 20016-8019 USA
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re: When will the new RC catechism be released in English?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 20:03:44 GMT

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
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:03:30 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject: Re: Scapular

I still have a few copies of 'The Secret of the Rosary' and will send one
to anyone who sends me a snail mail address.  I may be slow with the end
of semester crunch and Christmas season, so please be patient.

Jane Wallace Mayo       | Jesus, Redeemer, have mercy on me
mayo@cs.utk.edu         |    and set me free.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU