HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 10:14:56 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Re: The Real Presence

Cecilia De Blasi <cease@CARINA.UNM.EDU> writes in reply to me:
>>If He really wanted to make people believe in the Church's pet
>>theory on transubstantiation, He'd single out some Sunday and have
>>all hosts become organically human flesh. In fact, if He wanted to
>>show the importance of His maleness, He'd chose some other organ than
>>his heart:-)(sorry, couldn't resist) - J.J.

>Hmmmmmmm.  How do *you* know what God would do?  Do you know His
>mind so well?

I thought that I had phrased it well enough so it would be understood
as my "not so humble" opinion. The original story had Him changing a
Host into an organic piece of human heart for one particular doubting
priest. Based on this, I didn't think that it would be so unreasonable
to suggest that He should consider doing it for some of us other
doubters.

>  Please note that this question has nothing to do
>with the particular issue being debated in this thread.

Yes, it seemed to be a personal attack on me. Forgive me if I've misread
you as you appear to have done for me.

>- Cecilia De Blasi
>|    We're only immortal for a limited time.  - Rush     |

I would not suggest rushing through life, stop and smell the roses, Cecilia:-)
- J.J.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.0.4 1/31/90)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:53:12 HST
From:         Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject: Re: Celibacy oath
              27,  3:43pm)

Don, I find a large jump in your presentation.  The post referred to a
Roman Catholic priest leaving the Roman Church, and receiving a
dispensation from the Pope of his vow of celibacy.  You then project
this to laicizing him.  I was not awater that the ordination ritual of
the Roman Church contained any vow of celibacy.  He did not ask the
Pope to be dispensed from his ordination vows, only the vow of
celibacy.  He then is received into the Episcopal Church as a Priest,
and may be married thereafter if he wishes.  I don't see the link you
assume.  Maybe I am missing something......???  Please explain.
Thanks,                       Len Howard
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:05:01 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject: Re: The Shroud of Turin

frank lopez <FRANK@125LAW1.LAW.UCLA.EDU> writes:
>  But as usual I'm sure that J.J. has the answer :{] ;-[] (:->)
Yes I do, I have recently acquired several pieces of the shroud myself. My
source also threw in several large fragments of the original cross. I'll
be letting them all go to the highest bidder. (cash only) Yes, folks, you
too can run your own tests on the original, so bid high and bid early:-) -J.J.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:15:09 -0500
From:         URSIC@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      RE: The Real Presence

"Greg Wolff writes:
|>>my belief that transubstantiation cannot be deemed "infallible"
      ^^^^^^
>    However, the question that is the implicit foundation for our argument
>    is an eternally, deadly, serious one.

OK, maybe "belief" is a bit strong, how about "musing". - J.J.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Stephen A. Creps)
Subject: Re:      RE: The Real Presence
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:06:12 GMT

In article <930121150555.2e2092e3@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM> URSIC@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM writes:
> "Greg Wolff writes in reply to what I wrote:
>>>my belief that transubstantiation cannot be deemed "infallible"
>>    The Council of Trent dogmatically defined, in an infallible statement,
>>    that "transubstantiation" is the correct and necessary understanding of
>>    the Real Presence.  "... let him be anathema who denies this ..."
>Yikes, where'd all these frogs come from, they're hoppin all over me:-) -J.J.

   My theory is that they came to eat the locusts.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: jhalat@csfb1.fir.fbc.com (James Halat)
Subject: Re:      Re: condemnation of homosexual acts is (un)necessary...
Reply-To: uunet!csfb1!jhalat
Organization: First Boston Corporation
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 20:37:43 GMT

In article <9301261417.AA132672@oldgwenbnc>,         mlj@EVOLVING.COM writes:
|> [...]
|> How would you explain the Burst of insanity that the "Spirit" would move/stir
|> the hearts of men to engage in an act that is detrimental and non-productive
|> to the human race?
|> [...]



Detrimental how?
Unproductive how?  

-- 
James Halat                    e-mail:  uunet!csfb1!jhalat          
The First Boston Corporation   -- I speak only for myself --
New York City
From: mfulsmb@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Martin Barry)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Language, Meaning, Truth (Was: Homosexual acts)
Date: 21 Jan 93 09:50:19 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre, Manchester, England, M13 9PL.

In article <1993Jan20.031203.8835@news.nd.edu> jocallag@artin.helios.nd.edu (john ocallaghan) writes:
>Jim McIntosh writes:
>>Greg Wolff said:
>>>Truth never changes, only the means of the teaching changes.

: Yes, exactly. The truth remains the same, but how we describe it has to
: change as the language changes and the minds of those who hear those words
: change.
: Now we have to find the words to
: communicate the truth we know. The words of the past no longer suffice.

>Here are a couple of words of the past, that if your statement is true,
>no lnger suffice:  I am the way, the truth, and the life; he who believes
>in me shall never die.

I don't think Jim is saying anything different from what Pope John XXIII
said. It's objective fact that (i) languages change and the meaning of
specific words change; (ii) cultures change and the preconceptions and
connotations which people associate with particular words and phrases also
change. When our Lord said "I am the way, the truth and the life" (if
strictly speaking he did say it -- I once heard an eminent Dominican canon
lawyer say that the Gospel of John contains all the things our Lord would
have said if he had had time to say that much :-) ) he said it in Aramaic,
and it has been restated in many forms since then before arriving at the
modern English version. With simple (?) words like those we have a very
strong likelihood of understanding their meaning in the way our Lord
intended; but what of "hiding your light under a bushel" or "a camel passing
through the eye of the needle"? These are both instances where biblical
scholarship suggests that the literal meaning is not what would have been
understood by hearers in our Lord's day. Likewise "the waters above the sky"
uses words that suggest a simple interpretation should be possible, but the
mismatch between old testament cosmology and modern cosmology means that this
is not so.

In short, it is self-deception to claim that the only authentic manner of
articulating the truths of the faith is the one they originally received; or
to claim that earlier formulations of the truth will still necessarily be
intelligible in linguistic or cultural terms. A kind of fundamentalism,
perhaps?

Martin Barry.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mts: smtp
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 11:44:11 -0500
From:         bath@DW3F.ESS.HARRIS.COM
Subject:      Re: Why is it?
              20 Jan 93 22:00:15 PST." <9301210600.AA23021@enet-gw.pa.dec.com>

Thank you for your reply to my posted questions.  In reply to your
desire for a formula for computing the date of Easter, the following
method was devised in 1876 and appeared in "Butcher's Ecclesiastical
Calendar".  It is valid, without exception, for all years of the
Gregorian calendar (years after 1583).  It makes use of integer
quotients and remainders.

Divide          by      Quotient        Remainder
the year        19         -                a
the year        100        b                c
    b           4          d                e
   b+8          25         f                -
  b-f+1         3          g                -
19a+b-d-g+15    30         -                h
    c           4          i                k
32+2e+2i-h-k    7          -                L
a+11h+22L       451        m                -
h+L-7m+114      31         n                p

n = number of month (3 = March; 4 = April)
p+1 = day of the month of Easter Sunday

Why does this work?  I've tried to analyse it and see some astronomical
periods in it (19 years of the Metonic lunar cycle, leap years, etc.),
but I don't fully understand it.  (It is easy to write code for, though).

In the Julian calendar, the date of Easter is as follows:

Divide          by      Quotient        Remainder
the year        4          -                a
the year        7          -                b
the year        19         -                c
19c+15          30         -                d
2a+4b-d+34      7          -                e
d+e+114         31         f                g

f = number of the month (3 = March; 4 = April)
g+1 = day of the month of Easter Sunday

To check this, Easter was on April 12 in 179, 711, and 1243.

The history of controversy surrounding the date of Easter is quite long
dating all the way back to dicussions between Polycarp and Anicetas in
A.D. 158. (By extension, all the way back to St. John since Polycarp
knew John.)  The rules were laid down at the Council of Nice in A.D. 325:

1. That everywhere the great feast of Easter should be observed upon
one and the same day; and that not the day of the Jewish passover,
but, as had been generally observed, upon the Sunday afterwards.

2. That the 21st day of March shall be accouned the vernal equinox.

3. That the full moon happening upon or next after the 21st of March
shall be taken for the full moon of Nisan, the Jewish month of which
the 14th day is Passover.

4. That the Lord's day next following that full moon be Easter day.

5. But if the full moon happen upon a Sunday, Easter day shall be
the Sunday after.

The problem, of course, is that if you use the astronomical full moon
for requirement 3, you may violate requirement 1.  That is where the
concept of "Golden Numbers" and the artificial paschal moon came from.

Thanks again for your information.

Ken Bath
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Apparently-To: catholic@american.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 09:07:55 PST
From:         "Greg Wolff, MISG, ICS::,
              MSO1-1/J50 28-Jan-1993 1201" <wolff@ICS.ENET.DEC.COM>
Subject:      Church discrimination (was condemnation of homosexual acts)

    Raymond Lang <lang@CS.TULANE.EDU> writes:
|In article <9301271911.AA02646@enet-gw.pa.dec.com>,         "Greg Wolff, MISG,
|ICS::, MSO1-1/J50" <wolff@ICS.ENET.DEC.COM> writes:
|>     The Church does not show more concern about the one over the other.
|>     The Church teaches that either will estrange a soul from God eternally
|>     if not repented of in this life.  She is equally concerned about both.
|
|No, as a matter of fact, she's not.  The Vatican recommends that
|practicing homosexuals be discriminated against in a number of
|areas, while they make no such recommendation against those performing
|heterosexual acts out of wedlock.

    The recent Vatican letter about civil laws and homosexuality states
    (paraphrased) that the civil government is not allowed to put in place
    laws that make homosexual acts a protected right.

        homosexual acts are not to be protected as a RIGHT of the person
        adulterous acts are not to be protected as a RIGHT of the person

    These two statements are both teachings of the Church.

                                            In Christ the Savior

                                            Greg Wolff
                                            wolff@ics.enet.dec.com
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
X-Envelope-to: CATHOLIC@american.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 13:06:09 PST
From:         J Scott Berg <ALHY@SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: The Real Presence
              27 Jan 93 15:45:26 GMT." <A06A7766D0E1123A@SCS.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>

A minor point, Steve: I think the article in question was not written
by Rahner.  That book is a collection of articles by various folks
that he has put together.  I'm not sure what degree of approval he
gives to the articles...

                                -Scott Berg

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed here are, of course, my own and nobody else's.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Scott Berg
email: ALHY@slac.stanford.edu
real mail: Varian Physics
           Stanford  CA  94305-4060
phone:  (415) 926-4732 (w)
        (415) 326-2631 (h)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 09:26:33 -0600
From:         Joel Neisen <joel@MSC.EDU>
Subject:      Re; PREGNANCY

Eileen,

I guess I hadn't seen a lot on abortion in this newsgroup recently,
more about homosexuals, what is sin, etc.  Yet it is clear from your
tone that you felt 'called' to write what you did, may I ask why
you felt so strongly moved to do so ?

If I may presume upon you even more, what must I do to become a
devout catholic man ?

joel
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:33:40 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Re: The Real Presence

Steven Otlowski <aiden@NCOAST.ORG> writes:
>God is Really and Actually present everywhere.

Yes, but I believe it is the concencration level were concerned with
here:-) - J.J.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: creps@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re: Edward Schileebeecx (sp?) writings & Justification by Faith...
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:45:05 GMT

In article <6589@mccuts.uts.mcc.ac.uk> mfulsmb@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Martin Barry) writes:
>>    One book that I would suggest is Cardinal Ratzinger's....
>
>Yes, thank you, no further questions.

   My, aren't we _ad hominem_ today.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Stephen A. Creps)
Subject: Re:      Re: Origins
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:06:38 GMT

In article <930121111531.2e2092e3@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM> URSIC@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM writes:
>Steve, I think this is your queue:-)

   Well, since I'm being "queued" I'll see what I can find to respond
to.

>What are you trying to say, Thomas? You don't accept the definition of
>species? That we can show that new species come into existence through
>mutation and that there are no other obsevable mechanisms that produce
>new species, should lead one to logically deduce that at one time or
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>another all species came into existence through the mutation of other
>species, including humans. Perhaps you have some observable evidence
>to present of some other method of the origin of species, as you appear
>hesitant to accept the fact that humans mutated/evolved from another
>species?

   While I choose to remain neutral in this debate, I do dispute your
statement about logical deduction.  One may be able to extrapolate
such a thing, but one cannot logically deduce it with complete
certainty.  For example, can you prove that there is no other
mechanism possible, such as genetic engineering resulting in a new
species?

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: aiden@NCoast.ORG (Steven Otlowski)
Subject: Re: condemnation of homosexual acts is (un)necessary...
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 06:57:31 GMT

In article <9301261431.AA07790@trent.noname> "Donald J. Magee" <djm@TRENT.ATT.COM> writes:
>> >>Some of what the Vatican teaches is the Truth.  Some of it isn't.  What
>> >>they teach about homosexuality isn't.
>> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> >
>> >And to what do you attribute this startling revelation?  The misinformed
>> >judgement of ex-catholics or protestant theologians, or homosexual
>> >activists, or the media, or _your_own_opinion_?
>> >
>>
>> Have you ever considered the possibility of the Spirit
>> moving in the hearts of the people?
>>
>> At one time slavery was commonly accepted as a part of the culture
>> of the time.
>>
>> Later people realized that slavery was an evil, and the Spirit prompted
>> them to do something about that.
>>
>> Have you ever considered that maybe, just maybe, the Spirit
>> is calling on us to set aside yet another of our prejudices?
>>
>> Steve Otlowski-
>>
>
>The teaching of the Sacred Scriptures and the of the Fathers of the
>Church are not exactly "predjudices" as we have in common usage.
>Unless of course God's condemnation of sin qualifies as His Divine
>"Predjudice".
>
>Don Magee
>trent!djm@jolt.att.com

You aren't listening.  "Sacred Scripture" at one time or another, allowed
for slavery, the slaughter of your enemies, and countless other atrocities.

Does that make these things right?  You can not blindly accept the words of
Scripture, Church tradition, or Church law. 

Scripture is by definition a historical account.  Church tradition and 
law are made to be changed.  

We must write the law not on stone, which can not change, but on our
hearts, which must change continually in order to live. 

All these things must be continually re-examined in the light of the
times and with the discernment of the Spirit moving within us all.

The question is not "Is this what I am told is right?"
but "Is this what I belive to be right? and "what is the Spirit calling
me to accept?"

My twelve years of Catholic Education taught me much, including the fact
that the Spirit calls in the hearts of all, not just to 
priests and bishops and popes.

Christ taught : "You shall love the Lord your God
with your whole heart, with your whole soul, with your whole mind.
This is the greatest and first commandment.  the second is like it:
You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
On these two commandments the whole of the law is based, 
and the prophets as well."  MT 23:37-40.

This is the measure of all Church tradition and law.  

If a law or teaching means breaking the spirit of the Shema, then
it must be false.

Can you deny to another the basic human dignity you would hold for
yourself?  If you do, you break the Spirit of the law and declare yourself
a hipocrite.

Steve Otlowski-

Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: 15942@brahms.udel.edu (Stephen Barr)
Subject: Re: Receiving Holy Communion in the Episcopal Church
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:57:01 GMT

     Well, JJ, the reasons for the rules as I understand
them are not childish. But (as the Church with the Eucharist)
I do not dispense my explanations except to those who are
properly disposed to receive them. :-). Steve.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Missouri-Columbia Campus Computing, 314-882-2000
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:20:46 CST
From:         CCCAMPER@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Subject:      RE: The Real Presence
              22 Jan 1993 12:56:44 -0500 from <URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM>

On Fri, 22 Jan 1993 12:56:44 -0500 <URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM> said:
>
>When I said:
>>Not only that, but with advances in medical science, the actual second
>>coming of Christ, may be in that of a clone. - J.J.
>
>I was referring to the theory that an entire person could be duplicated
>(cloned) from any of their individual cells (any DNA contains the entire
>map). So if we indeed have a piece of Jesus' heart, we should be able to
>duplicate Him.

I understand what a clone is. I didn't understand the idea of cloning
Jesus. Its not that I don't have a sense of humor (too much so, usually)
I just couldn't figure our how this was meant to be funny or how it
related to today or our world, etc.         *duh*

>When I said:
>>(Hmmm, I wonder if anyone has considered requiring prospective priests
>>to have the exact blood type of Jesus:-)
>
>Here I was implying that since we only allow males to represent Christ in
>the priesthood because of some "natural resemblance" tradition, if we indeed
>were able to determine Jesus's blood type, perhaps we should also only allow
>males of a certain blood type to the priesthood. The smiley was that I
>wasn't too serious in this suggestion since the blood type of the

 But you seem to put smilies in so many places it can appear that you
 are serious about nothing and only working as court jester in the
 middle of serious discussion. This is doubtful, so I usually ignore
 your smilies. O:) So, in all seriousness, I really wanted to understand
 what your underlying message was. Is.

>apostles could not be inferred from Jesus'. Or do we know that Jesus
>would have only chosen apostles with the same blood type as Him:-)

So it seems from this response that your remarks were related to
females and priesthood. ?
>
>Hope this helps, and I'll try not to encode my responses to your
>messages too much in the future. - J.J.

As often happens, the true content of what I was posted was ignored.
What do you think of the bread and wine turning to real human flesh
and blood for the doubting? (assuming this is real) Just curious.

In Christ,
Elizabeth

BTW, thank you very much for taking the time to respond. I usually only
need explanations for my husbands very *worst* and driest jokes. ;-)
It seemed you were making a point, but it escaped me. ( another little
public humility lesson for Elizabeth ) *grin*
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Missouri-Columbia Campus Computing, 314-882-2000
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:43:16 CST
From:         CCCAMPER@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Subject:      Re: The tragic tale of a moral theologian.

On Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:06:26 CST Diane Jennings said:
>I dont understand.. is everyone on his side or hers?  I think
>he is wrong.. spouting off as a Catholic, yet telling Catholics
>and anyone else in the room that abortion is your CHOICE.. I
>think he better rethink his CHOICE of Religion...

Please disregard this message. A Catholic friend of mine is not on
the net for anything other than work, and I forwarded a post to her.
She was stunned that "reply" went public. (and a bit shook, too.)

In Christ,
Elizabeth
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: ajpg1322@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Angelo J. Paguia)
Subject: Goodbye for now
Summary: Goodbye for now
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 07:35:17 GMT
Keywords: Goodbye for now

Since I am about to submit my thesis soon and graduate, I am going 
to be stripped of my university email account this Friday, the 29th.

This group has been a source of sustenance for me for the past few
months that I was involved in it. I will try to find a way to get back
in, like trying the freenet (does anyone know if the freenet can
access this group, read and post to it ?). But if I do not succeed
soon (and I will return) and before they shut me down, I would like
to say thank you to all of you that have provided some spiritual glee.

As a wish and a prayer, I invoke Scriptures (Numbers 6:24-26):

[May] the Lord bless you and keep you !
[May] the Lord let his face shine upon you, and be gracious to you !
[May] the Lord look upon you kindly and give you peace !

And (John 15:27),

Peace is my [goodbye for now] to you,
My peace is my gift to you;
I do not give it to you as the world gives peace.

And so, I bid you peace, my dear friends in Christ.
Angelo J. Paguia