HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.0.4 1/31/90)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 13 Oct 1992 09:52:08 HST
From:         "(Len Howard)" <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject:      Re: Homosexuality
              Homosexuality" (Oct 13,  2:09pm)

Wait one, Karl,  You are illustrating a very common misconception
about homosexuality.  Your comment about homosexual activity being
"very dangerous in today's world, as is any promiscuous sex." is
suggesting that ALL homosexuality is promiscuous.  You and I both know
this is not the case.  I submit there are likely 10 times more
heterosexual promiscuous acts of sexual activity every day in this
country.
   To apply to Church's position, i.e. *no* sex ouside of marriage,
creates a "Catch-22" situation, and is really comparing the
not-comparable.   There is no marriage for homosexuals, by definition.
So it seems strange to exclude them from sexual activity because they
cannot do something that is not allowed by law.

I hold the positions suggested by Owen Thomas and John Macquarrie,
that theology is a dynamic issue, and needs to be constantly
reevaluated to keep it in contact with current social thought.  Our
teacher of theology in the Diocesan Institute went so far as to say
that any theology writing older than 20 years is out of date.  This
does not say that scripture is out of date, mind you, only that our
understanding of the perpetual truths contained in the Bible must
constantly be reevaluated in light of new information.

This problem of the theological aspects of homosexuality cuts across
many lines, and with the diversity of opinion in the theological arena
it is no wonder that we cannot agree here.  I would merely hold up the
truth that God loves each one of us from all eternity.  It is not our
job to judge our fellow humans, it is our job to love them.  Jesus did
not qualify the second great commandment by saying "Love your neighbor
as you love yourself if his ideas agree with yours."  We are charged
with loving the unlovable, wheather we like them or not.

Let's not forget it.

Shalom,                               Len Howard
                                      tas@pegasus.com
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: from SUNY College at Buffalo, NY 14222
X-Envelope-to: catholic@auvm.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"catholic@auvm"
X-VMS-Cc: PIATKONM
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 15 Oct 1992 09:22:22 -0400
From:         "Nancy M. Piatkowski" <PIATKONM@SNYBUFVA.BITNET>
Subject:      English translation

There is a new sacramentary due out soon that is a new translation- ICEL,
(referred to by Amanda) has been working on it for several years. There is a
basic committee of theologians, liturgists and grammarians and then others
outside the committee who make suggestions- Then, from what I remember, their
trnslation goes to he Bishops' Committee o nthe Liturgy and thence to Rome for
approval. Hopefully the translation will be more majestic and flowing-  One
change that takes effect the first Sunday of Advent is at the end of the
readings is from "This is the Word of the Lord" to "The Word of the Lord"
Nancy
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wayne J. Warf)
Subject: Some questions
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 16:39:17 GMT

First, my background: 

I grew up in what some apparently consider the most conservative 
Archdiocese in the U.S. <Philadelphia>, went K-12 in parochial schools, 
got a Bachelor's and Master's from a Jesuit university <St. Joseph's>,
and was employed by the Archdiocese for 2 years as an internal auditor
<under John Cardinal Krol>. Given this background, please tell me if
my perceptions are skewed a bit.

Current situation:

I'm a doctoral student and engaged to be married next June. My fiancee,
born a Methodist, has decided to convert to the RCC. We've started
attending Mass and RCIA together at the campus Newman center. This is
where the questions come in. I'd like to know if certain practices are
common that I've seen here. I've never seen them elsewhere.

For example, the last Mass we attended:

-the penitential rite was omitted

-the creed was omitted

-the gospel reading was an "adaptation" that I can only describe as a
 skit or caricature; it was done with Christ and the Apostles doing
 street talk. It was very uncomfortable to me and felt almost like a
 personal violation. 

In RCIA last night on a discussion of the sacraments:

-It was stated as a matter of fact that the RCC has never taught that
 intentionally and habitually missing Mass was a serious enough sin
 <or a sin at all, was the implication> to disable one from receiving
 Holy Communion without first receiving absolutionThe statement
 made was that even if someone decides not to go to Mass for 20 years,
 they could receive Communion without seeking rReconciliation first.

-One participant related how an acquaitance's husband was denied 
 Communion by a pastor who knew he had not attended Mass for a 
 number of years and had not received absolution. The speaker
 accused the pastor of being a "bad priest".

-It was stated that the precept requiring receiving of the Eucharist
 during Easter time was, "to encourage people to show up at least
 once a year," but was not binding.

Everyone there is apparently comfortable with these teachings except
me. Is my catechism out of date? Am I just a victim of my background?
-- 
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
 | Wayne J. Warf -- WWARF@ucs.indiana.edu -- I speak for myself only  |
 |"Government is like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearful master" |
 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Catholic vs. non-Catholic schools
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 92 18:03:02 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

Here's one for you parents out there.  My son is currently in a 4-year old
pre-K class at a local private school.  Next year he will be in kindergarten,
and we will have to choose between three possibilities:  keep him in the
private schook he's in (it's a small private school that goes from pre-K
through high school), public school, or our parish school.  I've pretty much
ruled out public school, leaving the other two as the real choices.

My wife was educated from K-12 in Catholic schools.  My mom was an public
school principal, and I went to her school for grades 1-4.  (They transferred
me to a Catholic school in grade 5 to increase the chances of my being accepted
into a Catholic high school.  During baby boomer time, there were enough kids
that the schools could turn down applicants).  Despite that, in my opinion, the
private school is superior to our parish elementary school (smaller class
sizes, more personal attention, etc.), my wife has a problem with Justin going
to private school because it isn't a Catholic school.  I attibute this mainly
to the fact that she doesn't know anything different, but it's a tough nut to
crack.

I received my first Communion as a public school kid who got his weekly
religion class on Saturday morning, and was confirmed after going to CCD
classes because I went to 8th grade at my high school.  I don't think I missed
all that much in the years I didn't have daily religion classes.  Given that
there just aren't as many priests and nuns in parish schools (our parish has 5
or 6 nuns teaching at a school of 600), and the priests don't have much time at
all to get over to the school, I tend to view the schools based on their
academic merits.  The intangibles of being a 'Catholic' school just don't seem
to be there any longer.

Anyway, I'd like to hear from folks who have their kids in public/private
schools and send them to Sunday school (or Saturdays as it is in some
parishes).  Are you satisfied with this?  If you could, would you prefer having
your child in a parochial school?





|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: 15942@brahms.udel.edu (Stephen Barr)
Subject: Re: women priests
Organization: University of Delaware
  In the analogy of Paul Christ is the head/bridegroom/man
  while the whole Church (not the individual member) is the
  body/bride/woman. The collectivity is "female". The 
  priest is the "male" element, the body of believers in
  its collectivity is the female element. 
  These differentiations cannot be drawn TOO sharply. 
  We are all a "priestly people" : we are a "royal priesthood"
  and the Church teaches the doctrine of "the priesthood
  of all believers". But the ministerial priesthood is a male
  role. In a sense, the Whole body offers and is offered, but
  in another sense it is the head of the body who offers.
  At Mass the priest offers TOGETHER WITH, BUT AT THE HEAD OF
  the whole people. 
       As an individual I am not theBody of Christ but a member
  of the Body. I am not the Bride or the Bridegroom, but the
  offspring of that union. As St. Augustine says: The Church 
  like Mary is a Virgin Mother who is always giving birth to
        like MaR
  new members of Christs Body. So the parallelism is really
  head/body/member    Bridegroom/Bride/child of God 
  Christ/Church/member of Church. regards Steve. I hope this
  is intelligible. Steve.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 21:28:18 GMT

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: v5875bza@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Michael M Gorman Jr)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: altar girls and all that
Date: 9 Oct 92 23:55:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

I was looking in canon law about the question of altar girls
and only found one thing--and it might not even be relevant.
Anyway, I'm putting it here to provoke people who actually
know about these things to post stuff.  There is a matter
of fact here--is it prohibited, and if so, by whom.  I'd
like to know!

  Canon 230.1 says:  Lay men...can be installed on a stable basis in the
  ministries of lector and acolyte....
  230.2  Lay persons can fulfill the function of lector during liturgical
  actions by temporary deputation; likewise all lay persons can fulfill the
  functions of commentator or cantor or other functions, in accord with 
  the norm of law.

  [230.1  Viri laici...ad ministeria lectoris et acolythi stabiliter assumi
  possunt...
  230.2   Laici ex temporanea deputatione in actionibus liturgicis munus
  lectoris implere possunt; item omnes laici muneribus commentatoris,
  cantoris aliisve ad normam juris fungi possunt]


Comment 1.  There's clearly a difference between being in the stable
ministry of lector and being called in to do it as a temporary deputy,
and likewise for acolyte.

Comment 2.  Is acolyte the same thing as altar server?

Comment 3.  If the answer to #2 is yes, then it would seem that women
can't be installed as permanent altar servers, but that they can be
deputized to do it now and then--one could argue for this by saying
that the way for it is left open by saying that lay persons can
perform "other functions".

Comment 4.  What's a commentator?

Anyway, somebody straighten us out!  Quote the texts to us!


MG
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: RE: Catholic vs. non-Catholic schools
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 16:16:12 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM writes:

>
> Well to close out the story, both my spouse and I graduated from the same
> Jesuit University (for some of you, this may not count as a Catholic
> education:-) and for you romantics, we met and married in the band)
> Don't know if this is what you were looking for Ed, I tend to ramble:-)
> We'll offer our daughters the same school choices, but their local public
> school spirit appears to be the same as our sons' is. - J.J.
> -just another cradle cafeteria catholic with no credibility:-)-

JJ, thanks for the thoughts.  It's the kind of thing I'm looking for.  I guess
that, in your case, the key is a good CCD program in the parish.  Not having a
school does indeed contribute to that.  I know that, if I don't opt for my
parish school for Justin, I can guarantee him a good religious education, since
my dad is quite active with the CCD program in the parish where they live (two
over from me.)  That's assuming I don't like what I see in the one here at St.
Ann's.

Anyway, thanks.  It's a little hard for Justin to make his own choice on
schools at 4, so I appreciate the input.





|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
From: ewanco@MLO.DEC.COM (Eric James Ewanco)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Fatima, Part 5 (Medjugorje
Date: 14 Oct 92 17:44:31 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Elizabeth,

Thank you so much for posting those Marian messages! It is nice to see
all of them summarized, and I know you must have spent a lot of work
typing them in.

Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"Catholic@American.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 8 Oct 1992 10:33:48 -0400
From:         URSIC@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Peer pressure and grape juice

Gordon writes:
------------------------------------------------------------------
J.J.,
	Aside from the horror I feel at the whole idea of grape juice at
Mass.... does your congregation understand that they most certainly
do not need to receive under both kinds in order to fully receive the
body and blood, soul and divinity of Christ which is truly present
in either the host OR the chalice?  It sounds from your post like people
think if they don't receive from the Chalice that they're somehow missing
something.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Gordon,
I don't think it's a matter of them not understanding, I think that
they feel that if it is there, you simply 'must' receive both.
Much like Fred had complained about row after row of people filing
out to go to communion, I think peer pressure plays alot in people
receiving both forms of communion whether they want to or not.

Since my youngest insists on the family sitting up front so she
can see better, I have observed that those who don't recieve
the Chalice seem to go out of their way to avoid eye contact with
that person. I, therefore, make it a point to smile and say hello
to the person holding the Chalice even though I don't drink the
wine myself. I suppose I should consider myself fortunate since
I do have the opportunity to receive both, as I know that other
larger parishes do not offer wine to the 'general public', but for
me the actual taste of the wine detracts from the real meaning.

Hmmm, upon further reflection of what I've just written, a good
case could be made for me not to be sitting up front at church,
from some of my previous posts, perhaps I should be waiting in
the car:-) - J.J.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 9 Oct 1992 11:58:10 -0400
From:         Eric James Ewanco <ewanco@MLO.DEC.COM>
Subject:      Re: stay or leave... opinions?

Excerpts from catholic: 9-Oct-92 stay or leave... opinions? Donna
Nitchie@WOOKIE.CAM (1567)

> A current RC (ok, it's me) has difficulty accepting EVERYTHING the RCC
> professes, eg, no intercommunion, no contraception,
> role of women (altar servers to priests), RCC teachings as absolute, etc.
> Some I passively challenge, or just don't agree wtih, some I actively do
> (eg, contraception). But at the same time, there are things about the RCC
> that I love and actively participate in (mass and other church services,
> sacraments, groups, etc.), and get great guidance out of some Church
> teachings/beliefs.
> . . .
> So what do readers suggest or advise of someone in such a situation? Does
> anyone know what the RCC suggests someone in my situation do? I haven't
asked a priest or bishop or (pick your favorite RC official)....

Well, Donna, I think you could also be happy in certain Episcopal
churches.  You can find Episcopal churches that are nearly identical to
Catholic churches in style and such, and they aren't as dogmatic.  I
don't think you would lose much; you would find much familar in the
Episcopal church, and probably many more people who agreed with you.

On the other hand, you don't need to agree with _absolutely_ everything,
for not everything is necessarily binding on all Catholics.  If you
disagree with an article of faith that is required for Catholics, and
you can't bring yourself to believe it, then maybe leaving is the best
choice.  The things you mentioned I don't believe would put you in this
category.  If, on the other hand, you categorically reject the authority
of the church, or the infallibility of the college of bishops and the
Pope when he speaks infallibly (ignoring for the moment what you may
think has been spoken infallibly, for you could be mistaken, but I am
referring to the very idea), then there's not much point in being Roman
Catholic.

Eric
From: aitken@CS.CORNELL.EDU ((William E. Aitken))
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: English translation
Date: 16 Oct 92 20:11:28 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
              16 Oct 92 18:50:29 +0000.
              <9210162000.AA17360@cloyd.cs.cornell.edu>

> I'm not sure, but I _think_ raising the Book of the Gospels is part
> of the rubrics.

	That's what I thought too.  But when I made (an admittedly very
hasty check this morning) I couldn't find it.

> If I remember, I'll try to look it up.  As for a
> deacon receiving a blessing from the celebrant before proclaiming the
> Gospel, I believe it too is part of the rubrics.

	I'm sure you are right here.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sun, 11 Oct 1992 12:37:19 -0400
From:         "(William E. Aitken)" <aitken@CS.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Altar girls and millstones
              10 Oct 92 11:44:10 -0700.
              <9210110532.AA27847@cloyd.cs.cornell.edu>

>
> 	"18. There are, of course, various roles that women can perform
> in the liturgical assembly: these include reading the Word of God and
> proclaiming the intentions of the Prayer of the Faithful.  Women are
> not, however, permitted to act as altar servers."
> 			-- Inaestimabile Donam
> 			   "Instruction Concerning Worship of the
> 			   Eucharistic Mystery"  4/17/80

	Of course, as I have already pointed out to this list,
_Inaestimabile Donam_ has no legislative power of its own, but rather
merely re-echoes prohibitions of the GIRM and the 1917 Code of Canon Law.
Therefore, if the prohibitions of these documents cease to bind, it
too ceases to bind.  Clearly the prohibition of the 1917 Code no longer
binds: the entire code has been replaced.  As I have already pointed out
to this list, some Canon lawyers believe that the prohibition in the GIRM
has ceased to bind.   In order to substantiate the claim that those who
employ female Altar servers are in clear violation of Church Law,
what is required is a clear and unequivocal legislative or judicial
statement that prohibits the use of female Altar servers, and that post-dates
the current code of Canon Law.  This prohibition may be either universally
or nationally binding.   I know of no such statement.

							--- Bill.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: sinead o'connor
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 11:52:29 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

pol30546@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Peder Larsen) writes:

> oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil) writes:
>
> >Why do you assume those in the audience are "godless?"
>
>  I don't think he was.  He was simply stating how non-Catholics and
>  non-Christians seem to respect the Pope.

Non-Catholics and non-Christians are hardly 'godless,' unless they are
atheists.

>
> >Although, I can really understand how some people are just plain sick and
> >tired of the wars that happen in the name of religion -- whether that
> >religion be Catholicism, Protestantism or Islam.
>
>  I don't know about you but I don't consider Catholicism and Protestantism
>  to be different religions.  They have many differences of course in their
>  respective approaches but the religion for both is Christianity.

Unfortunately, others do see them as different religions, and are willing to
carry that belief to the point of killing those who are not part of their
denomination.



|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: jdd@db.toronto.edu (John DiMarco)
Subject: Re: Women Popes
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:24:07 GMT

FRANK@125LAW1.LAW.UCLA.EDU writes:

>> I hadn't heard the story that there were three.  I read sometime back
>> that one woman managed to fool 'em all for a number of years & was
>> eventually elected Pope.  She was found out when she gave premature birth
>> on horseback (sounds tough) during a procession.  Since she had only been
>> Pope for a month, she was written out of Church history.  If there was
>> and credibility to the story I don't know how you'd find out.  I've read
>> so many outrageous Papal stories that anti-Catholics pass off as truth
>> that I'm pretty skeptical of most of them.


>    Legend has it her name was Pope Joan.  The Oxford History of the
>Popes has an article in it on her and according to them all
>histories on women popes are in fact only legends.  There is not nor
>has there been any truth to them.  If I can find the book at home I
>will post some, if not all, of what it says.

That's essentially it. The Oxford history writes:

Catholic criticism of the legend became increasingly vocal from the middle
of the 16th cent., but it was a French Protestant, David Blondel (1590-1655),
who effectively demolished it in treatises published at Amsterdam in 1647 and 
1657. It scarcely needs painstaking refutation today, for not only is there
no contemporary evidence for a female pope at any of the dates suggested
for her reign, but the known facts of the respective periods make it impossible
to fit one in. The origin of the story, however, has never been satisfactorily
explained. Its kernel is generally taken to be an ancient Roman folk-tale which
was blown up by a number of circumstances needlessly taken to be suspicious - 
e.g. the deliberate avoidance of a certain street by papal processions 
(probably because of its narrowness), the discovery in it of an enigmatic 
statue taken to represent a woman suckling a child and of a puzzling 
inscription near by which could be twisted to support the legend, and the
popular belief (from the late 13th cent.) that after his election a pope
had to undergo tests that he was really of the male sex. 

J.N.D. Kelly, THE OXFORD DICTIONARY OF POPES. Oxford University Press, 1988.
pp 329-330.

John
--
John DiMarco                                              jdd@cdf.toronto.edu
Computing Disciplines Facility Systems Manager            jdd@cdf.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto                                     EA201B,(416)978-1928
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU