HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Louie Crew)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Saints in the Episcopal Church...
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:18:32 GMT
Reply-To: <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

>"John W. Woolley" <jww@EVOLVING.COM> writes:

>>
>> The only person ever "canonized" in any kind of official way by the
>> Anglican Church is Charles I, King and Martyr, King of England and
>> Scotland from 1625 to 1649, who suffered for the faith at the hands of
>> Puritans.  His feast is celebrated on the anniversary of his martyrdom
>> on January 30, 1649.  He was canonized by act of Parliament (!) in, I
>> think, 1660.

Another asks:


>Parliament?  That figures, given the period.  Fr. John, do you know if there is
>a specific reason why Episcopals have declined to canonize anyone since then?



>|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
>|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|


The official calendar of the Episcopal Church is published in the 
Episcopal Church Annual, and St. Charles the Martyr is not and never
has been listed.

Those who think he should be are members of the Society of St. Charlees
the Martyr.  I do not have their current address.


-- 
  ==========================================================================
  Louie Crew, Academic Foundations Department, Rutgers University, NWK 07102
  lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu                                   201-485-4503
                   Preferred:  P. O. Box 30, Newark, NJ 07101
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:13:40 EST
From:         Carol Goodson <cgoodson@SUN.CC.WESTGA.EDU>
Subject: Re: consecration of Russia
              "CCCAMPER%MIZZOU1.BITNET@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU" at Jan 5, 93 12:24 pm

> too greatly offended". There was to be a collegial consecration of
> Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. If this was not done, Russia would
> spread the errors of communism throughout the world and entire nations
> would be annihilated. This consecration has not yet been done, although
> some, including a Fr. Robert J. Fox in "Soul" magazine, have tried to
> say that it has been done.

Pope John Paul II *has* consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart, and I read
 ((recently) that Sister Lucia herself has said that his actions have fully met
the conditions requested by the Blessed Mother at Fatima.


********************************************************************************
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
********************************************************************************
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: stabosz@chopin.udel.edu (Rae Stabosz)
Subject: Re: Intercession
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 03:10:44 GMT

In article <CATHOLIC%93010519083513@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU> Steve Creps <creps@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU> writes:
>   I would like to acknowledge the intercession of the Blessed Virgin
>Mary, St. Joseph, St. Jude, and other Saints for a very favorable
>answer to my prayers.
>
>-       -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -
>Steve Creps, Indiana University
>creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu

****

This is why I love this newsgroup.  I love to read about reality.
It's very encouraging.  Thanks, Steve!

Rae

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:57:00 EST
From:         "Alfred S. Chavez" <achavez@UMSA.UMD.EDU>
Subject: Re: consecration of Russia

Elizabeth writes:
>Pope John Paul II has made a consecration, but it has not been done as
>requested by Our Lady at Fatima.
>There is an ongoing effort to get the consecration done as requested,
>namely the Pope and all the bishops of the world consecrating Russia,
>not the entire world, but this has NOT been done yet.

Of all the byproducts of the great 50's expectation that was built up around
the third secret of Fatima, this latter day insistence over an exact
formula that MUST be followed, OR ELSE, is most puzzling.  It reminds me of
the pharasees in the gospel, insisting on sticking to the letter of the law,
and in so doing, missing its spirit.   As though, perhaps, there is more
power in the formula than in the Virgin and her Son.  Focussing on a formula
smacks of superstition and it is the reason IMHO that a lot of normal folks
get turned off when they hear about it.
His Peace,
Fred Chavez
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Missouri-Columbia Campus Computing, 314-882-2000
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:14:12 CST
From:         CCCAMPER@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Lies about the Consecration

On Fri, 8 Jan 1993 12:26:00 PST Jim McIntosh said:
>>...
>>One thing is certain, if we truly are in the end times, and triumph
>>of good over evil is dependent upon a collegial consecration of
>>Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, it is not too difficult to
>>imagine that Satan would cause total confusion over this act.
>>I pray that we may find the truth. If we are led to believe it
>>has been done satisfactorily when it has not, God help us all...
>
>Now where did this come from? "Triumph of good over evil is dependent upon a
>collegial consecration of Russia"? As much as I look through my scriptures I

Poorly worded when read separately. " ...and God asks something of man
in His triumph of good over evil " ( the consecration )
I'm sorry I stated it that way so you were compelled to write this note.

 "In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will
  consecrate Russia to me; it will be converted.."

Our Lady knew that God would triumph, good would win over evil. It appears
that God asks man to be a tool in accomplishing His will. I believe this
is an ordinary way for God to act. (?)

The urgency of the consecration being that, although we know God's will
is to be done, the longer the consecration takes, the longer the world
will suffer. And possibly the more souls that will live and die in
error and lose eternal life. This is why I care to learn if it truly
has or has not been done (consecration).

In Christ,
Elizabeth
"Mercy is the flower of Love"
                          Sr. Faustina "Divine Mercy in My Soul"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: wbs@vax.oxford.ac.uk (Brian Stewart)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Saints in the Episcopal Church...
Date: 11 Jan 93 18:25:11 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <9301061610.AA49998@evolving.com>, jww@EVOLVING.COM (John W. Woolley) writes:
> Edward Branley asks:
>> Does the
>> Episcopal Church canonize people on their own, or do they simply recognize
>> those canonized by Rome?
> 
> Anglicans in general recognize saints canonized either by Rome or by the
> Eastern Church, and also commemorate notable Anglicans (who are almost
> never called "Saint").  The Episcopal Church even has entries in its
> calendar for people who weren't Catholics of any stripe.  

>*****(The Anglican Catholic Church does not.) ********
> 
> In Christ,
> -- Fr. John Woolley


Really? None at all? I thought the Scottish principle of 
``Well, they ken the noo!'' was operated whenever necessary;
it would surely be hard to decide which stripe of Catholic 
were 

St John Baptist
or
St Joachim and St Anna, the Ancestors of God

who figure in many catholic calendars.

I tease.
B.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:24:00 EST
From:         "Alfred S. Chavez" <achavez@UMSA.UMD.EDU>
Subject: Re: EWTN

Jim McIntosh writes in reply to Elizabeth, in re: Medjugorje:

>For one thing, they seem to be very inwardly centered,
>much as the Church was in times past, rather than directed out to the world.

The network of Medjugorje-inspired Marian Centers, prayer groups, message
"hot-lines," conferences, and newsletters, not to mention the coverage it
has gotten in the secular press, would seem to argue against this.

>My second problem is the lack of a Christ or Gospel focus.

If this is bothering you, read up on the events in Scottsdale, Az.  There
are three small volumes circulated by the Reihle (pronounced "really")
Foundation for a donation, called "I am Your Jesus of Mercy", (P.O. Box 7,
Milford OH. 45150).  They also have a volume done by the Mariologist Fr.
Rene Laurentin, "Our Lord and Our Lady in Scottsdale," for $7.

>This is the third problem I have with these events, the gnostic quality.

Don't think anyone is claiming any special knowledge other than the exact
contents of the secrets, which will be made known.  The wait is to give many
an opportunity to finally live the gospels sincerely and thus be fully
prepared for whatever happens.  I don't think that, whatever the particulars
are, the secrets can possibly exceed what is already foretold in scripture.

>Why is it we humans have to be threatened with punishmment in order to
>want to do good?

Don't know a good way to explain this.  But I do know it is in line with the
gospels.  I grew up somehow focussing on the doom and gloom aspects of the
gospels, all the "Woe to..." parts.  (As Barbra Streisand sings, "I was
raised on the good book Jesus...now I don't believe I want to see the
morning."  I'm very much grateful for the change brought on by Vatican II
that corrected this over-emphasis.  But the dire warnings are still there.
You can look at the Medjugorje experience the same way, and if not careful,
miss its positive emphasis.

Jim, you make many valid points, that are all necessary in discerning what
really is going on in Medjugoje and elsewhere.  St. Paul requires us to test
everything--you are doing a good job, in my opinion.

His Peace,
Fred Chavez
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Tuesday, 12 Jan 1993 06:25:27 EST
From: Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Newman and Norfolk


Len,

The information you were told about the Oxford Movement is rather
garbled.  I suggest you read the articles on Newman and on the Oxford
Movement in any good encyclopedia.  Then read Newman's _Apologia Pro
Vita Sua_, which everyone should read anyway.  It is a classic of
spiritual autobiography which is studied even by secular students of
19th century literature.

Do you have any documentation for your statement that Newman was
conditionally ordained when he entered the Catholic Church, or was it
just the unsubstantiated claim of this confused priest?

Catholic student groups at non-Catholic colleges are known as Newman
Clubs because of Newman's book _The Idea of a University_.

Those "progressive" Catholics who use Newman as a guru of rebellion
do so by misreading him.
-------
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
From: zerucha@shell.portal.com (Thomas E Zerucha)
Subject: Re: The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8:1-11)
Organization: Portal Communications Company -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091 (data)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:29:30 GMT

In article <930111151302.2e0078a0@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM> URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM writes:
>
>>If anyone can explain how Adam's words, repeated by Jesus about the two
>>becoming one (and it is specifically monagamous and heterosexual) can occur
>>in a gay or lesbian relationshiop I would be very interested.
>
>Adam who? You've lost me,... unless you think the only qualification for a
>valid marriage is the ability to produce genetic offspring.
>

Genesis 2:24, Adam (the first man) "and they shall be one flesh".
Matthew 19:5,6, Mark 10:8-9 where it is repeated.

Much of modern science is also suspect.  I do not believe in modern theories
of evolution (either punctuated equilibrium ro neodarwinianism).  Also, this
is bit.listserv.catholic, not b'.l'.ecumenical.  I do not understand the
concept of "one" flesh clearly, neither do I understand transubstantiation?
If you do take the eucharist, why if you don't understand it?  why bother?

---
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
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Apparently-To: catholic@american.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 14:52:04 PST
From:         "John R. Covert 08-Jan-1993 1747" <covert@COVERT.ENET.DEC.COM>
Subject:      Re: The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8:1-11)

>Not all tradition is Tradition.  For example, the doxology at the end of the
>Lord's Prayer ... how long did it take the scribe's addition to become
>tradition?  How long for the addition to be recognized as such and removed
>(but not from protestant versions)?

I think you may have this story a bit confused...

There is something about this doxology in the new catechism, but unfortunately
I've loaned my copy to one of my parish priests for the next few weeks.  In
any case, it's right there in the Roman Catholic Novus Ordo Mass, separated
from the Lord's Prayer by a brief sentence spoken by the priest.

In various Anglican liturgies, it either appears or doesn't appear, depending
on the nature of the liturgy.

/john
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: zerucha@shell.portal.com (Thomas E Zerucha)
Subject: Re: The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8:1-11)
Organization: Portal Communications Company -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091 (data)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:02:44 GMT

In article <9301110122.AA15248@pegasus.com> Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM> writes:
>     In his chapter on Scripture in Sykes and Booty's "The Study of
>Anglicanism", Reginald Fuller, retired Professor of New Testament in
>Virginial Theological Siminary makes the following statemt,  "The
>insipration of Scripture is not to be understood as a once-for-all

First, this is bit.listserv.catholic, so I don't go by sola scriptura, nor
by people who seem to read whatever they want into scripture.  What about
tradition and natural law and philosophy?  Scripture is merely one part.

But let me turn it around - If I get a different "inspiration" from scripture
than you do, then who arbitrates the correct interpretation.  Let me give you
a sever example: Person A is a homosexual, and interprets liberally and finds
that he is doing nothing contrary to scripture.  Person B reads the severe
condemnation and penalties against the practice and takes the idea of capital
punishment literally.  Are they both free to pursue their differing views?  I
would condemn both (and can give details), but how can you condemn the
second - other than saying that you are "personally opposed to Gay Bashing..."?

My earlier message about how do you determine what is good and evil also
applies.  I can find interpretations of scripture for any position you
would care to take - but is the interpretation correct?  Or do you repeat
Pilate's "what is truth?".

---
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: zerucha@shell.portal.com (Thomas E Zerucha)
Subject: Re: The Woman Caught in Adultery (John 8
Organization: Portal Communications Company -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091 (data)
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:05:55 GMT

In article <Jan.11.22.00.26.1993.2115@andromeda.rutgers.edu> <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu> writes:

[some potentially legitamate discussion deleted given the summation:]

>
>Thomas, sugar, from my fleeting convertible I throw you one hot, holy
>lesbigay kiss.  Ride in that chariot with me next June.  (Or with
>the new Quean for the Day:  My bishop will ride this time, and I will
>walk....!)  It's a lot like the Palm Sunday celebrations, also 
>followed up with chants afterwards of 'crucify him,' 'crucify him!'
>
>Faithfully,
>H.R.H.Quean Lutibelle
>
>-- 
>  ==========================================================================
>  Louie Crew, Academic Foundations Department, Rutgers University, NWK 07102
>  lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu                                   201-485-4503
>                   Preferred:  P. O. Box 30, Newark, NJ 07101

Much as the members of Act Up who desecrated the host at St. Patrick's,
Or Sr. "Boom Boom" and her bunch, I wonder why I even have to bother with
reason when my opposition abandons that as readily as their virtue.  If the
first few paragraphs were supposed to say anything, you have undone whatever
you were trying to accomplish and have fallen further with this last.

Woe to the society where no one is rational nor practices self-control.
---
zerucha@shell.portal.com - main email address
Thomas Zerucha / 24075 Lee Baker / Southfield MI 48075 - hardcopy
(313)594-4941 - work phone
Pax Domini sit sempre vobiscum
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:11:19 CDT
From:         Eric Lee Green <elg@ELGAMY.JPUNIX.COM>
Subject:      Re: R-movies in parochial school?

:Brent Winiger <ABDWINIG@IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU> writes:
:>If the movie industry rated the movie "R", it probably was for a good reason.

Note, though, that it's not necessarily for a reason that would preclude
its being shown in a parochial school. I won't comment upon "The Lost
Boys", since I haven't seen it. However, there is another movie that I CAN
comment upon: "Glory". This story of black soldiers in the American Civil
War was rated R because it told the truth: it depicted the violence of
that bloody war (which killed or wounded close to half the young men of the
American South), and it accurately depicted the racism of white army
officers towards black enlisted men -- complete with racial slurs.

I do not, however, think that it is appropriate for students at my level
(4th grade). For that matter, I would not show it at all, even if I taught
high school honors history: I teach in a public school in a district that
invariable comes down on the side of the censors when it comes to
controversial topics in the classroom. The only reason I even know about
"Glory" is because a teacher was fired for showing it, and I'm not
interested in being next.

I'm curious about how a movie such as this would be recieved in a parochial
school... do parochial schools show more or less courage when it comes to
tackling controversial topics like war and racism? I suspect it depends
highly upon the principal, but...

 Eric Lee Green  elg@elgamy.jpunix.com   Dodson Elementary
 (713) 664-6446                             Houston, TX
                "Kids are kids, no matter what"
From: fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: contributions
Date: 9 Jan 93 18:58:29 GMT
Organization: CompuData Inc.

cgoodson@SUN.CC.WESTGA.EDU (Carol Goodson) writes:

>or at least I have not heard of it.  I would find this very offensive.  As
>you can see, I live in the South; perhaps such aggressive customs have not
>yet made it down here...and I hope they don't.

The South is still missionary territory of sorts, a diaspora among Baptists. 
:-)

Carrollton (which seems to be where you are posting from) has one Catholic
church which also supports the Newman Center at the West Georgia College.  The
territory of the Archdiocese of Atlanta includes almost 4 million people.
Roughly 175,000 of them claim to be Catholic.  Some of them go to church -
maybe a third?

In the entire Diocese there are less then 5000 parochial school students 
enrolled. Try a couple hundred thousand and you will understand that we are in 
different worlds from a financial need basis. Two or three churches in 
Philadelphia would have as many students in their parochial schools as are in 
your whole Archdiocese. Do you see the difference? Who do you think pays for 
all this?

Fred
-- 
W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     'mans feet have grown/so big 
26 Warren St.   home: fred@icdi10.compu.com  that he/forgets his littleness'
Beverly, NJ. 08010                          		Don Marquis 
609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr   
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:09:19 EST
Reply-To:     Louie Crew <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>
From:         Louie Crew <lcrew@ANDROMEDA.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Saints in the Episcopal Church...

>The official calendar of the Episcopal Church is published in the
>Episcopal Church Annual, and St. Charles the Martyr is not and never
>has been listed.

That is, of course, the Episcopal Church in the United States.  Each national
Church may publish its own calendar.

Bl. Charles, King and Martyr, appears on the unofficial but heavily used
Ordo Kalendar which is distributed through many (most?) Episcopal parishes
in the U.S.

/john

OF COURSE, indeed, John.  The subject line here all along has been about
ECUSA and how we officially do things.

Saints don't show up in the Red Book arbitrarily.  It requires voting by
the House of Bishops and by the House of Deputies.  For example,
when Aelred was added to the calendar a few years back, my bishop,
Jack Spong, called attention to the House that all scholarship establishes
Aelred as a gay monk.  He did so so that they could be quite intentional
about including him.   Florence Nightingale fared less well when the
two houses voted on her status at General Convention in Phoenix.

OF COURSE, anyone can bypass the communities that make official policy
and send out promotional calendars of any sort and any volume that they
can afford.  I even participate in this auxiliary process myself, and
applaud it; I was for many years a member of the Society of King Charles
the Martyr myself, in the period when my anglophilia threatened to be
terminal.   I'd probably vote him onto the calendar myself.

But we were not talking about individual decisions here.

Quean Lutibelle



  ==========================================================================
  Louie Crew, Academic Foundations Department, Rutgers University, NWK 07102
  lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu                                   201-485-4503
                   Preferred:  P. O. Box 30, Newark, NJ 07101
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU