HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: EWTN
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 07:33:32 CST
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

bobv@spike.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Bob von Buelow) writes:

> In article <k21TwB2w165w@mintir.new-orleans.la.us> elendil@mintir.new-orleans
> >Was wondering if anyone had any opinions regarding EWTN and its programming.
>
> I find it much to conservative for my tastes.  It seems to smack so much of
> the magic approach to religion that I find so distasteful.  Occasionally some
> of the more 'technical' talks are informative.  I am sorry to feel so
> judgemental but the 'if we all just spend more time in front of the Blessed
> Sacrament' approach is not what I believe in.  I think we should be watching
> CNN and finding out what the world problems are, reading the local paper to
> see when the next public hearing on opening a homeless shelter will be
> held,  and talking to our brothers and sisters in the office and on the
> street to find out what their concerns are ... and then acting on that
> information in a christian and Catholic way.  I do like Mike Manning a bit.
> I also find myself nodding off during some of the shows.
>

Well, I did notice that EWTN is picking up a program called 'Focus,' which is
produced here in New Orleans at WLAE (which is a PBS station owned by the
archdiocese, btw).  The on-camera people on that show are big on Medjugorje, so
they're always doing stories on the trouble in the Balkans, etc.

I do agree with you, however, that God works through mortal agents more than
through direct intervention, so there better be a few mortal agents at work in
the world.  The problem here is that the Church needs to be in the awareness
business a bit more.  Robertson's news bits on the 700 Club are a good example
of the right format.  When some legislature or school board tries to do
something they don't like, they'll do one of those news stories on it.
whenever I'm working at home, I always try to catch the beginning of the 700
Club to watch his version of the news.  While some of the stuff is off the
wall, some of the issues they're raising are legitimate.  Catch is, with
Robertson in the forefront, the credibility is shot.

I've heard others say that Fr. Manning is pretty good.  These guys remind me of
some of the Brothers that taught me.  I get the feeling that if I fall asleep
watching them, I'm going to find a piece of chalk flying at me from the TV set
:-).




|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CATHOLIC%AUVM.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
X-VMS-To: IN%"CATHOLIC%AUVM.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 11:06:42 -0500
From:         "What, me worry?" <ACSWILEY@EKU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8:1-11)

Ok my second post folks so here I go, please be gentle :)

   The scriptures are very sound when it comes to sexual immortality.
Paul speaks about a man should take a wife and visa versa. He does not
say for a man to take another man. Or a woman to take another woman.
As far as homosexuals go, I love them, I have a good friend who is gay
and he is a really cool person. But I do hate the sin. I pray for him
that God will intersede and somehow change him. The Bible is also very
clear about heterosexual immortality, Jesus spoke about this more than he
did about homosexauls. BTW, the campus Gay and Lesbian support group
meets at the Newman center here on campus. Anywho, I would not like
the idea of a Priest being gay, or a Priest being married. Or a woman
being a Priest. Most of the Priests I have talked to (central kentucky
area) subscribe to the above beliefs. Father Greg here at EKU jokes
thank God for celebacy) because when you take a look at his appointment
book its filled from 8am till 11pm, and he's not an old fuddy duddy
by any means.

                                             sincerely
                                             the catechumenate
                                             Bill Wiley
                              @my 10,000 carots or less   :)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: 15942@brahms.udel.edu (Stephen Barr)
Subject: Re: Communication Problems, Gregory XVI and (oh, no, not again) Railways
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:43:46 GMT

     By the bye. I have since all those discussions we
had, martin, on submission etc. gone back and reread 
Newman's Letter to the Duke of Norfolk. I know you
are familiar with it because you have quoted from it. 
My views are entirely at one with those expressed by 
Newman in that Letter. I am speaking of his views
on conscience, the Papal magisterium, the "pietas fidei",
submission and related matters. So if you want to 
know what I think, look there. If you want to attack
my views on these subjects, you may effectively quote
from there, since if any of my statements can be shown
to be at odds with Newman's (on this subject) I will
submit. Steve. 
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: bdboyle@erenj.com (Bryan D. Boyle)
Subject: Re: Church rules
Organization: Exxon Research and Engineering Co., NJ
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 13:29:46 GMT

In article <199301071809.AA11897@caritas.cotdazr.org> "Gordon C. Zaft" <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG> writes:
>
>        No, a dispensation is nothing like an annulment.  A dispensation
>is a waiving of Church law.  An annulment is a statement that there was
>not actually a valid marriage.  Furthermore, Holy Orders are similar to
>baptism and confirmation in that they leave an indelible mark on the
>soul; once a priest, always a priest (even though one may be unable to
>exercise that ministry).
>}
>} Maybe I'd better place an order for that new Catechism:-) -J.J.
>        I've already got mine in.
>
>
Just as an aside, and with absolutely no agenda other than to let people
know...I am helping one of the french-to-english translators wordprocess
the english translation during my off-work hours...

Interesting stuff.  It will certainly remove some of the VII fuzzies in
some areas...and probably increase the noise level, if not the signal,
on this list....:-)



-- 
\   Bryan D. Boyle            \           _         ______ |
 \  Senior Engineer            \        /   \___-=0`/|0`/__|
  \ Exxon Research & Engineering\_______   N7068W  / | /    )
  / 908 730-3338                /        `/-==__ _/__|/__=-|
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: zerucha@shell.portal.com (Thomas E Zerucha)
Subject: Re: Confiteor
Organization: Portal Communications Company -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091 (data)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 00:32:22 GMT

No, he is talking about the total ommision of any prayer that is of the form:
"I confess to almighty God... that I have sinned...".  I was at a mass like
that.  The used the original greek for the Kyreia (sp?).  I think that they
didn't want to injure anyone's self-esteem with the possibility that they
might be sinful or need mercy.  The old Tridentine rite still uses the old
form of the Confiteor (1962 Missal) but as you may know, only the priest and
servers say it.  Novus Ordo masses in Latin can use either.

---
zerucha@shell.portal.com - main email address
zerucha@fim001.ets.ford.com - work address
Thomas Zerucha / 24075 Lee Baker / Southfield MI 48075 - hardcopy
(313)594-4941 - work phone
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: jbuffer@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James J Buffer)
Subject: Re: Walker Percy
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 23:33:19 GMT

Following Percy
by Lewis A. Lawson
Whitston Publishing Co.
Troy, NY 1988

In Search of Self
Life, Death, & Walker Percy
by Jerome Taylor
1986
Cowley Publications 
980 Memorial Drive
Cambridge Mass 02138

Walker Percy and the Postmodern World
by Mary K. Sweeney
1987
Loyola University Press
3441 Ashland Ave
Chicago, Illinois 60657
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: mcm@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Saints
Date: 11 Jan 93 16:49:33 GMT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

I have a question about saints.  I'm in the RCIA process and the knowledge of
everyone astonishes me.  So, I'm sorry if these are terribly simple questions.  
First, is it right that people are declared saints only by the Catholic church? 
Second, I am trying to pass on to my children an interest in their Swedish 
heritage and so we celebrated St. Lucia day this past December.  I would like
to read more about the saints, especially St. Lucia.  Can someone recommend a
book to me?  Thanks very much.  Melissa
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 09:07:37 MST
From:         Brent Winiger <ABDWINIG@IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8:1-11)
              12 Jan 1993 11:01:17 -0500 from <URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM>

On Tue, 12 Jan 1993 11:01:17 -0500 <URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM> said:
>"Stephen A. Creps" <creps@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU> writes:
>>   So you are instead denying the infallibility of Sacred Scripture?
>>The inspiration and infallibility of Scripture are a basic Catholic
>>belief.
>
>Fortunately, I'm not your "basic Catholic", but then, you knew that:-)
>Being inspired doesn't imply correct transcription, nor does it mean
>that it is literally correct.
>


J.J., please tell us what basis you have for believing that Scripture may not
have been correctly transcripted.  Also, given your significant doubts about
the veracity of Scripture, Tradition, and the teaching authority of the
Church, please tell us why you believe anything at all about Christianity and
in particular, the Catholic Church.  While I'm asking - Have you examined any
of the volumes of apologetic works which deal with the subject of correct
transcription of the Bible?

Thanks,
Brent
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.0.4 1/31/90)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 13:51:29 HST
From:         Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject:      Re: Newman and Norfolk
              Norfolk" (Jan 11,  6:30pm)

Hi John,  What I was sharing with you about Newman comes from an
ex-Roman Catholic priest, now Anglo-Catholic, who is the most erudite
person on the topic of liturgy of the Church I have ever known.  This
is not from a book, which represents one point in time in a person's
life that may later change, but from his collected studies over the
past 30 years including a year as an exchange priest in England where
he studied the history of Anglican liturgy for a year.  His point was
that Newman during that time wished to bring the Church of England
back closer to the Roman Church, but was rejected by the C of E, who
were into Evening Prayer mode.  Read the Articles in the 1789 BCP
about the 'popish' tendencies of some things we accept totally now.
And I don't proport to present anything 'adequate' about him, only
what I thought was an interesting vignette in the man's life, in the
context of a situation in the C of E that is totally unlike what we
have today.  We practice a living religion, John, which means it grows
and changes in time.  Here is a tiny example of how things change.
Shalom, my brother                         Len Howard
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Stephen A. Creps)
Subject: Original Sin
	(was Re: The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8:1-11))
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:35:14 GMT

In article <CATHOLIC%93011117223767@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU> lhh@LCUXLP.ATT.COM writes:
>>   Back to Adam and Eve, a Catholic doesn't have to accept the fact
>>there there were a real Adam and Eve, but does have to accept that the
>>first people sinned in such a way that we all inherit a state of
>>sinfulness on account of it.
>
>        Is this true ? I thought by "nature" we are without sin.
>        The "original sin" that we inherit is actual the loss
>        of a special gift given from God to Adam and Eve. A gift that God
>        had intended to be inherited by all people.
>        Adam and Eve (or the "first people") lost our inheritance.
>        Due to the loss of this grace, we tend to sin.

   That is correct.  I didn't say otherwise.

>        It seems important to me because then God does not
>        create us in a state of sinfulness - he creates us naturally good.

   Yes, man's nature is good, because it is created by God (see
Genesis for this too).  It is, however, damaged, due to Original Sin,
which we inherit.  It is a heresy to say that man is basically evil,
or "utterly depraved."

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:13:00 EST
From:         "Alfred S. Chavez" <achavez@UMSA.UMD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Lies about the Consecration

Jim NcIntosh writes:

>A couple of days I posted a short list of questions about consecrating
>countries. I was completely serious about wanting to know something about the
>matter.

Sorry, Jim, I thought you were engaging in a little *reductio ad absurdum*.

>From your answer above I gather that once we consecrate this particular
>country, all suffering will stop.

I'm stumped.  Hope someone more didactically oriented than I will tackle
this one.  I know the problem of evil comes into this, and the consequences
of sin, both subjective and objective.  Gospel eschatology [ie, the study
of the last things, Armegeddon, etc.] and the Books of Daniel and Revelation
come into play too.

>Or have I missed the boat once again?

Nope, good questions.

>Oh... and I have one quick prayer request. My Secular Franciscan Fraternity

Will do.

His Peace, and good night!
Fred Chavez
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Tuesday, 12 Jan 1993 17:22:00 EST
From: Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Saints
 <25871.726871050@SEGNO.SOAR.CS.CMU.EDU>

The Eastern Orthodox Churches belong to the Byzantine tradition.  They
or their parent churches were separated from the Catholic Church as
a result of the Schism of Michael Cerularius in 1054.  (I think that's
the date.  I am writing a quick reply from memory.)  (An Orthodox
Christian might use slightly different terminology to describe the
events.)  The Oriental Orthodox Churches are the Churches that broke
away in earlier centuries, such as the Nestorians and the Copts
and Armenians that are at least nominally Monophysite.  They
used to be referred to as the Lesser Eastern Churches.  The word
"Lesser" referred to their size, compared to the much larger Eastern
Orthodox Churches.  Apparently back around the 1960s people decided
that "Lesser" might seem to have derogatory connotations and Oriental
Orthodox became the accepted term.
-------
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:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 10:31:24 -0600
From:         Joel Neisen <joel@MSC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Lies about the Consecration

Bill

> based on the Holy scriptures, Jesus himself said that we will not know
> when the end times are going to be. Would someone emlighten me on all
> of this I be confused.


Jesus said that noone would know ahead of time when they would be.
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If however, we truly are entering the end times, there are many signs
that Jesus gave directly in the gospels as well as in Revelations
that would indicate the end times.

In any case the New Testament indicates the life we are to live
regardless if we are in the end times or not.

joel
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Encoding: 27 TEXT
X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:14:00 PST
From:         Jim McIntosh <Jim@AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject: Re: EWTN

On Thu, 7 Jan 1993 09:02:00 EST Alfred S. Chavez <achavez@UMSA.UMD.EDU> said:
>Yesterday there was an exchange concerning the consecration of Russia and
>the campaign by many Catholics, some lead by Fr. Nicholas Gruner, to have
>the Pope "do it right."

Okay (displaying my ignorance)... I've heard of consecrating bread and
wine, but never countries. Can someone tell me:

(1) What does it mean to consecrate a country?
(2) What is the right way to do it? The wrong way?
(3) What are the actual effects of consecration?
(4) Once consecrated, will a country act more justly? If so can we also
consecrate Iraq? How about Somalia? The US? Is there some way to propose
countries for consecration?
(5) Is the country consecrated, or the people? If the government is changed
do you have to consecreate the new entity? How about just a new party in
power?
(6) Does the country have to request it, or can you do it against their will?
(7) How long does a consecration last before you have to do it again?

Inquiring minds and all that...

Jim McIntosh SFO (jim@american.edu)
The American University
Washington, DC USA 20016-8019
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 09:48:51 EST
From:         Carol Goodson <cgoodson@SUN.CC.WESTGA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: contributions
              home" at Jan 5, 93 8:57 am

> Really? I'd like to see you in a pastor's shoes. I'm sitting here helping mine
> do a geographic map of donating habits so that these names can be given to
> people who will visit and ask for particular sums based upon past records.
>
> The church will always assume that we are giving in similar sacrificial
> levels. While this is not true, they must assume that. So the person donating
> $1000 may be able to add another 10% and a hundred dollars may be asked for
> while the person who gives $200 may only be asked for $20. We assume that the
> sacrifice is the same in either case.
>
*****if I were a member of your church, and this happened to me, (i.e., the
visit to ask for more money) I'd quit instantly.


********************************************************************************
Carol Goodson/ Coordinator/ Off-Campus Library Services
Ingram Library/ WEST GEORGIA COLLEGE/ Carrollton  GA  30118
(404) 830-2360 (Voice) --  (404) 836-6626 (FAX)
email: cgoodson@sun.cc.westga.edu
       cgoodson@uga.cc.uga.edu
       cgoodson@uga.bitnet
       70253.1146@compuserve.com
********************************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 13:29:00 EST
From:         "Alfred S. Chavez" <achavez@UMSA.UMD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Lies about the Consecration

Elizabeth counterpoints:
>>Point is, IMHO, the consecration of
>>Russia to the IHM, and the metaphor Russia represents here--all that is
>>evil, in the world, in nations, in groups, in individuals, in me--is
>>intended to draw us back to Christ. When we go to her, the first words we
>>hear are the last time she is quoted in scripture, at Cana, "Do as He tells
>>you."

>I'm not quite sure how you mean to relate this to the conversation.
>We are encouraged to come closer to Christ, and to help draw others to
>Him. However, it seems to me that God, working through Our Lady at
>Fatima, placed a great deal of importance on the consecration.

>Again, I do not wish to appear to "argue" about this. Until I can find

First, "arguing" about it, in the best sense of the term--"to enlighten"--is a
good thing.  I believe you are sincere and are approaching this topic
prayerfully and with an open heart.  Hopefully, I am, too.

My quotations from scripture were meant to emphasize the point that the
consecration is a means to an end, that end being Jesus Christ Himself.  I
think you may want to be careful not to get caught in a trap where you
decide that this is the only way to Christ and there is no other.  I believe
you would run afoul of scripture and Vatican II if you did.

And to the RCIA candidate:  Please don't let our free-for-all debate confuse
you.  You are in very good hands from the sounds of it at the Newman Center.
Late in John's gospel (I think), in the discourse at the last supper, is a part
that includes: "Do not let your hearts be troubled..."  Good advice when all
this eschatological talk heats up.

His peace,
Fred Chavez
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Argus Consulting, Tucson, AZ
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.4 2/2/92)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:10:14 -0700
From:         "Gordon C. Zaft" <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG>
Subject:      Re: Church rules

On Jan 4,  4:13pm, noao!URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM wrote:
} Subject: RE: Forwarded mail, and comments
} "John W. Woolley" <jww@EVOLVING.COM> and Colleen write:
}
} > As it is, I survived four years of attending mass and not taking communion.
}
} There is a silly little "catch 22" type rule which says that if you don't
} take communion during the Easter season, you can't take it until you
} confess to not taking it. This may still be a "rule" or it may have
} gone the way of "eating meat on Friday", in either case, ignorance of
} the law is still a somewhat valid excuse in the Church:-)

        Incidentally, the more correct term would be 'receive' rather
than 'take'.  The Eucharist is a gift, not something we have a right
to.
}
} My question is would receiving communion in the Anglican Church count towards
} our Easter duty? or any Church besides "Roman Catholic"? Is this one of those
} decisive differences where Rome claims "Your Momma never really received
} Christ, 'cause He's not present in your communion?:-)
} (if this sounds offensive, consider the source:-) I really don't see a
} difference, either He's present when His followers "do it in memory
} of Him" or He's not. Whether we call it "trans" or "con" would seem
} to be irrelevent to Him.

        Well, doe you not see a difference because you don't understand,
or merely because you don't think the difference is important?  Which
'it' do you think Jesus was referring to?  And who decides?
}
} Hey, I like rambling too...so does anyone also know about the rule about
} receiving communion too often. Isn't there another rule about only receiving
} it once a day unless there are "emergency" conditions (like the Hosts are
} about to be desecrated by ungodly communists:-)

        Actually, you can receive twice inthe same day now.
}
} There are a lot of silly Church rules, but the one on marriage doesn't
} appear to be one of them. I think it comes down to "what God has joined,
} let no man part" or something like that. But since he gave His apostles
} the power to join through Him, it would seem reasonable that they would
} also have the power to "unjoin" through Him, whether they know it or
} not:-) maybe even an eight sacrament:-)

        No, it doesn't seem reasonable, since Jesus specifically said
that what God has joined men must not put asunder.
} Are priests who leave the priesthood and marry allowed to receive
} communion? Seems like the same type of vow being ended to me.

        It's not the same.  First of all, they have to have received
a dispensation.  Second, the one is God's law, the second is the Church's;
she may dispense her own laws but not God's.
}
}-- End of excerpt from noao!URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM



--
* 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.