HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.0.4 1/31/90)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 10:33:50 HST
From:         Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject:      Re: infant baptism
              3:00pm)

Bob, I discussed this topic with Fr Vince last night, and he basically
said the same thing as my last post, i.e
1. The sacrament is valid by itself thru the grace provided by God.
2. The priest should be contacting the parents, and grandparents of
the infant to attempt to discern the faith, beliefs and commitments of
the family involved.
3. It is primarily a pastoral problem.

After hearing the actual situation, I cannot see any basis for the
actions of the priest.  The family is supportive of the child, and
will truely affirm all the promises.  The community is supportive of
the child, and, by their actions in attending the baptism, affirm
their intentions to be supportive.  Your children are committed to the
faith and are programmed to attend marriage encounter at the earlies
possible time, and have a date to be married [I certainly hope the
priest is willing to marry them in the church and allow the child to
be in attendance].
    This case harkens back to the marriage customs of the first
century church, i.e. the commitment to marriage is the betrothal, and
the marriage itself follows when all the provisions of the betrothal
are completed (such as finances, job, harvest is in, etc, etc.)
Marriage as a sacrament in the church came later, with many other
sacraments.  That first sentence should actually say marriage customs
of the first century Jews, as the customs of the church were unchanged
at that time.
     Sadly, it has been my own personal experience with my family
member trying to transfer from the Episcopal Church to the Roman
Catholic Church after she was married that makes me realize that some
priests are more concerned with 'letter of the law by their
interpretation' than with the spiritual concerns of the individual.

Shalom, my brother, and thanks for sharing.
                                             Len Howard
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:58:17 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Re: Women's Ordination

Richard A Chonak <norris@ATHENA.MIT.EDU> writes:
>If ordination were a sacrament that conferred grace on Christians for their
>own sanctification, it would be wrong to bar women from it.  But the
>sacrament doesn't convey sanctifying grace; it confers graces and powers for
>the apostolic ministry, which is a different issue.

So it doesn't convey grace, it confers grace. How does this differ from
matrimony? ...and is the "different issue" conferring power on women? - J.J.
From: elendil@seashell.mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: baptismal rites for infants in the roman catholic church
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 92 16:31:43 CST
Organization: Seashell Software

"John R. Covert 14-Dec-1992 0741" <covert@COVERT.ENET.DEC.COM> writes:

> I really don't understand why people who are hostile to the Church or are not
> willing to follow even its most basic rules (like getting married or coming
> to mass at least often enough that the priest recognizes them) want to have
> their children baptized in public or even private ceremonies in the church.

Gee, John, if having the priest recognize us is a prerequisite, I'm in big
trouble.  We normally go to 9:30 mass on Sunday, which is regularly said by the
rector of the seminary.  With two older priests for a very large parish, I'm
glad that they were willing to take our word for it that we go to church.  Of
course, they are very good about cashing our checks each week, so that may
help.




|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: norris@athena.mit.edu (Richard A Chonak)
Subject: Re: Women's Ordination
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 00:48:04 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.134840.6230@news.nd.edu>, jocallag@bach.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan) writes:
|> In article <921210160613.2020661b@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM> URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM writes:
|> >John O. Writes:
|> >>In short, saving grace is
|> >>offered to all as equal persons before Christ, but it does not follow that
|> >>every person is offered every mode of saving grace.
|> >
|> >In all that you wrote, John, I saw no reason why the saving grace of holy
|> >orders could not be offered to a few select females. (selected by God:-)
|> 
|> I was not giving an argument why holy orders could not be offereed to a
|> few select females,

If ordination were a sacrament that conferred grace on Christians for their own
sanctification, it would be wrong to bar women from it.  But the sacrament
doesn't convey sanctifying grace; it confers graces and powers for the apostolic
ministry, which is a different issue.

-_RC

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 08:22:00 EST
From:         DGPAZ@CLEMSON.CLEMSON.EDU
Subject:      Re: baptismal rites for infants in the roman catholic church

On Fri, 4 Dec 1992 19:59:58 CST "Edward J. Branley"
<elendil@SEASHELL.MINTIR.NEW-ORLEANS.LA.US> said:

> We had Kathleen baptized in the hospital, and followed that up with
> a formal christening in the Church a couple of months after she got
> out of the hospital.

She was baptised twice?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: met48546@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Marc E. Talbot)
Subject: Re: Moral Activity (was Re: Asylum)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:53:42 GMT

J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger) writes:

>I'm sick and tired of hearing the anti-lifers claim those of us who are
>opposed to abortion are trying to impress our moral values on the
>entire country.  The anti-lifers are trying to impress on the country
>their moral views that women should have the right to abort unborn
>babies.

>To be honest, I feel that all legislators are trying to impress their
>beliefs on the country, but the anti-lifers are just being hypocritical
>about it.

There's an important distinction though.  The "anti-lifers" (I'll use your
word if you'll use mine :-)) are trying to impress on the country their
moral views that women have the right to choose what to do with their bodies.
They are not, however, making that choice for you.
The "pro-unwantedchildrenwhomaygetlifebutnosupportaftertheirborners" want to
make that choice for everyone, regardless of the consequences.

The distinction comes in that no legislation by "anti-lifers" is going to
force you to do something you don't want to do (except maybe going to jail
for blocking clinics).

Marc Talbot

>--Ted Schuerzinger
>email: .zed@Dartmouth.EDU
>"Den Glaubenden gehoert die Ewigkeit."
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, 13 Dec 1992 13:58:37 HST
From:         Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject:      Re: baptismal rites for infants in the roman catholic church
              rites for infants in the roman catholic church" (Dec 13, 6:46pm)

The other possibility is that the couple do not even attend church and
just want the kid 'sprinkled' as some sort of magic.  I suspect that
most priests may be reluctant to baptize anyone who is not a child oc
[that should be of] a communicant.  There is much more to the baptism
than just the rite itself.  Our priest has said many times that he is
reluctant to baptize a child of strangers.  It gets into the
commitments made by the parents and godparents.  And as I mentioned
before, baptism is not just a magical process that somehow changes the
kid for good without any need for future action by the partents.  I
look on baptism as the admission ticket to the Body of Christ, but
there is much more to it than just walking through the door.

Shalom,                                   Len Howard
From: elendil@seashell.mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Asylum (sanctuary)
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 92 16:50:44 CST
Organization: Seashell Software

"John R. Covert 14-Dec-1992 1127" <covert@COVERT.ENET.DEC.COM> writes:

> It is my opinion that violence at clinics goes too far -- that civil
> disobedience in the form of chaining oneself in front of clinics is
> courageous -- but that praying the rosary in front of clinics is
> about as far as I'm personally willing to go.  Now, if DEC lays me
> off (not currently likely, I think), then I might be more willing
> to go to jail.
>

Wow, that entire case sounds like a mess.

John, I agree that violence at clinics goes way too far.  I'm saddened to see
that our Church is so involved in such extremism in Boston.  Down here, we had
a really bad brush with OR in Baton Rouge, with an Assemblies of God pastor
actually being videotaped assaulting two women on the other side.  Of course,
that clip was presented just after the station showed several Catholic priests
praying the rosary a significant distance away.  It came off looking really
bad.

To Steve Barr:  Based on John's recounting of this event, it looks like the
Church in Boston is very much participating in political activity.  Granted the
cause is good *this time*, but a prohibition should be a prohibition, lest the
Church be viewed as hypocritical.





|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: jocallag@darwin.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan)
Subject: Re: Asylum (sanctuary)
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 19:06:56 GMT

In article <0yZBVB5w165w@seashell.mintir.new-orleans.la.us> elendil@seashell.mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) writes:
>
>To Steve Barr:  Based on John's recounting of this event, it looks like the
>Church in Boston is very much participating in political activity.  Granted the
>cause is good *this time*, but a prohibition should be a prohibition, lest the
>Church be viewed as hypocritical.

Isn't there a significant differance between holding and exercising political
power in a government on the one hand, and lobbying those who do hold and
exercise such power?  Maybe its not a good distinction.
Peace, and Happy Advent.
John



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, 13 Dec 1992 21:23:15 HST
From:         Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject:      Re: baptismal rites for infants in the roman catholic church
              rites for infants in the roman catholic church" (Dec 14, 3:19am)

Jim, this sacrament is done on behalf of the infant.  The questions,
answers, promises, and renouncing is done by the parents on behalf of
their kid.  If they do not follow up with the promises made at the
time of the baptism, and, therefore, if the promises made by the
parents are not true, then I question the validity of the sacrament.

I repeat my contention that God will provide the necessary Grace for
the salvation of an infant, dying without sin other than Original Sin.
And the act of dipping the kid three times and signing him with the
cross is only a part of the sacrament.  If the promises made by the
parents are not valid, then the sacrament is not complete.

Shalom,                             Len Howard
From: jocallag@darwin.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Moral Activity (was Re: Asylum)
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:03:13 GMT
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame

In article <1992Dec15.180711.11096@u.washington.edu> mjsmith@cac.washington.edu (Martha Smith ) writes:
>One can be anti-abortion and still believe that political laws are not the way to enforce moral law.  The goal is to stop abortion; changing the law will not stop it - that we know from previous experience.  One needs to work for a moral climate in which children are valued, the community (family) interests have greater weigh than individual interests, where emotional/financial/social support is given to those raising children regardless of the circumstances of the child's birth ... Abortion will sto
>
>
>
> when the factors leading a woman to choose abortion are changed.  One cannot successfully legislate values; one can only legislate an environment that encourages those values (for example the anti-discrimination laws).

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?
Peace and Happy Advent.
John\
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sun, 13 Dec 1992 02:40:35 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Dec 13

                    Sunday, December 13, 1992
                    Second Sunday of Advent

Isaiah 35:1-6, 10                                       Psalm 146
James 5:7-10                                            Matthew 11:2-11

                           PATIENCE

"Be patient, therefore, my brothers, until the coming of the Lord." --James 5:7

Advent is a time of patience, as the Bible understands patience.  When we
speak of  patience, we mean putting up with inconveniences.  However, when
the Bible mentions  patience, it means suffering hardships.  James gives four
examples of patience -- farmhands who didn't get paid, farmers waiting for
harvest, "prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord" (Jas 5:10), and the
suffering Job.   Patience means suffering injustice, poverty, persecution,
or pain.  So Advent is not just waiting to open Christmas presents but
suffering major hardships, forgiving enemies, trusting God for the next
meal, and praying in pain.

Would you dare pray for a true Advent?  Would you enter the "great contest
of suffering" (Heb 10:32), accept the discipline of the Lord (Heb 12:5),
and learn obedience in the school of suffering (Heb 5:9)?  Do you want God
to humor you, or treat you as His child (see Heb 12:7-9)?  Do you want to
grow more than you want to feel good?  Do you want a new Christmas and a new
life or just reruns and minor modifications to the status quo?  The way of
the cross is the way to Christmas.


Prayer:  Father, may I count it pure joy when I am involved in every sort
         of trial (Jas 1:2).

Promise: "I solemnly assure you, history has not known a man born of woman
          greater than John the Baptizer.  Yet the least born into the kingdom
          of God is greater than he."  --Mt 11:11

Praise:  Jesus healed two sisters of breast cancer.
-----
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.
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:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 01:33:00 -0700
From:         "Gordon C. Zaft" <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG>
Subject:      Re: Asylum

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.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re: Myth exposed!!!
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:51:00 GMT

In article <BzBBoJ.DyL@news.udel.edu> 15942@brahms.udel.edu (Stephen Barr) writes:
>     But I did find evidence of my thesis!
>In a book entitled "A Dictionary of the Popes" by the noted
>Anglican historian J.N.D.Kelly I looked up the predecessor of
>Pope Pius IX, namely Gregory XVI. Kelly says:
>     "Gregory XVI was an austere, learned monk who was hostile
>     to modern trends (he refused to have railways in his
>     domains, calling them 'chemins d'enfer')."  
>'His domains' means the Papal States. I do not know French,
>but it appears that 'chemins d'enfer' is a pun. Railroads
>were called 'chemins de fer' meaning 'roads of iron'. I
>suspect 'enfer' is related to the English 'infernal'.

   Correct.  More precisely, "enfer" is the French word for "hell."

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: met48546@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Marc E. Talbot)
Subject: Re: Moral Activity (was Re: Asylum)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:33:02 GMT

bdboyle@erenj.com (Bryan D. Boyle) writes:
>In some areas of New York city, murder and rape is considered an
>inconvenience that interrupts the open selling of drugs by armed
>children on street corners.  Prostitution is openly practiced

>while the police look on.  The majority of people in those areas,
>if not supporting these vicious vices, at least by their silence, 
>implicitly allow this kind of thing to continue to go on.  So, does
>that mean that NYC should decriminalize murder, rape, and drug dealing
>(Even I don't think Dinkens would be that stupid, but, then, he
>has been known to surprise people)?  There are probably enough 
>people in the city that would not even blink an eye if it happened.

>Just because laws are passed to suit the majority's convenience, it
>still doesn't make it morally right.  Not situationally moral, mind you.
>There are still absolutes.  

I think that you're allowing media images to cloud your vision.  I don't think
that you can consider the majority of people who feel that these vices are
wrong to be implicitly supporting these actions by silence.  I think fear
plays a big role.  Contrary to the image portrayed by the media, I think
you'll find that most inner-city youths do not carry guns, don't engage in
prostitution, and aren't involved in the drug trade.  It's just more pronounced
because of the extreme visibility of those who do.  I think you'll still
find a clear majority (well over 95%, though I don't like to use a figure I
can't document, so this is a guess) of the people in those areas in favor of
laws against murder, etc.  In the case of these crimes, you find something
closer to a consensus than a majority, something which will never be the
case with abortion.

Marc

>-- 
>Bryan D. Boyle     |Opinions are mine, not Exxon's...
>Senior Engineer    |Internet Firewall Administration
>bdboyle@erenj.com  |On a clear day, you can see the Net...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Apparently-To: catholic@american.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 12:30:39 PST
From:         "John R. Covert 18-Dec-1992 1405" <covert@COVERT.ENET.DEC.COM>
Subject:      Re: When will the new RC catechism be released in English?

>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.

Let me hazard a (possibly totally incorrect) guess on what may be part
of what is going on here.

France, which was centuries ago a very good Catholic country, has been
extremely anti-religious since the French Revolution -- a time when
churches and cathedrals were ransacked and many, many priests and bishops
had their apocalyptic appointment with the living Christ at the guillotine.

But, this century, slowly, there has been a resurgence of faith in France.
The Vatican helped it along a bit in 1925, a year in which exactly two
saints were canonized:  St. Jean d'Arc and St. Therese de Lisieux, both
of whom were very, very popular in France -- St. Therese had only died
about thirty years earlier.

The French are very proud of their language and its (former) great stature
as a language of international commerce and diplomacy.

The choice of French for the official untranslated teaching may have been
a decision hoped to have some benefit to evangelism in France.

/john

P.S.: Schoenhof's Foreign Books in Harvard Square, Cambridge, tells me
that their shipment of the catechism is in.  $39.95.  I'm glad I picked
up my copy for about $27 at CDG airport on the way home from Jerusalem.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: 98yuwono@cua.edu
Subject: Prayer Request for Flores' Earth quake disaster
Organization: The Catholic University of America
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:21:13 GMT

Please pray for the victims of earthquake in the islands of Flores
(Indonesia). The beautiful Flores islands are predominantly Catholic.
Several of the brothers who taught me in grade school, as well as
a couple of priests here at Catholic University, come from Flores.

Please inlude them and their family in your prayer today.

thanks

Leo Yuwono

Ps. from the latest news i heard the earthquake and the resulting 
    Tsunami Took the lives of 1200 peoples or more.
Standard disclaimer applies...                             
 ==============================================================================
* Leonardus K. Yuwono			   *   	
* Internet: 98yuwono@cuavax.dnet.cua.edu   *  
* Bitnet  : 98yuwono@cua.bitnet            *  
**********************************AMDG**************************************** 
 

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Apparently-To: catholic@american.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:10:27 PST
From:         "John R. Covert 17-Dec-1992 1605" <covert@COVERT.ENET.DEC.COM>
Subject:      Re: Asylum (sanctuary)

>since the new Book of Common Prayer was writtin by the Episcopal
>Church of the United States, the swearing of allegience to the
>King/Queen of England have not been a part of the prayers.

The _NEW_ BCP?  There has been no swearing of allegiance to the English
Monarch since the establishment of the Episcopal Church in 1789 and
the production of the first U.S. Prayer Book in that same year!!!

In The Old North Church there is a copy of the old English prayer
book with the prayers for the King pasted over with new prayers for
the president -- this would have been used from some time during the
Revolutionary War until the U.S. Prayer Book was published in 1789.

In order to avoid pledges of allegiance to the British Monarch, The
Episcopal Church in the USA received its holy orders and liturgy
from Scotland (where the Episcopal Church was not the established
Church and was not quite so protestantized during the English Civil
War), which is one reason the Episcopal Church has always been a bit
more Catholic and that the concern of Rome about validity of Anglican
orders shouldn't apply to Episcopal orders in the U.S.

/john
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic