HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hwt@bcarh11a.BNR.CA (Henry Troup)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: A Different Thread (as far as I know)
Date: 6 Nov 92 18:02:54 GMT
Reply-To: Henry.Troup@BNR.CA
Distribution: world
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada

In article <9210281940.AA18900@pegasus.com>, tas@PEGASUS.COM ((Len
Howard)) writes:
|>children.  As a natural process, nothing unnatural must be introduced
|>else the process becomes unnatura, and thus disallowed.

Beds are unnatural, btw :-)
                                      
Henry Troup - H.Troup@BNR.CA (Canada) - BNR owns but does not share my opinions
"I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to
say it"
Organization: Argus Consulting, Tucson, AZ
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.4 2/2/92)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 6 Nov 1992 14:15:07 -0700
From:         "(Gordon C. Zaft)" <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG>
Subject:      Re: Question

On Nov 5, 11:17am, noao!URSIC@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM wrote:
} Subject: RE: Question
}
} 2) You scare the crap out of most Catholics; a celebant gay who is asking
} why he shouldn't be allowed to marry another celebant gay, perhaps adopt
} a few children, ...be a real family.
}
} OK, so maybe I don't "know" most Catholics are scared, but I'm sure the feel
} uncomfortable with the idea:-) -J.J.
}-- End of excerpt from noao!URSIC@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM

	[ "celebant"?  It's not in my dictionary.  What the heck are you
talking about?]

	Andy doesn't scare me.  Being uncomfortable is very different
from being scared.  Both are different from being opposed.

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.
23. ...  r-q1
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC%AUVM.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 09:10:54 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      RE: Proper scope of Science (WAS Bellarmine on Galileo5

Marty writes:
>The objection to ordaining women is not that it would cause the
>Church's downfall, it is that women cannot be ordained.

I know, Marty, never ever, ever never, never ever, ever never, never ever,
ever never, never ever.............:-)

Well some of us don't believe in never ever land:-) -J.J
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Organization: University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, North Dartmouth, MA, USA
X-VMS-To: IN%"CATHOLIC%AUVM.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:36:00 EST
Comments:     A VAX cluster with VMS V5.5, PMDF V4.0-22, JNET V3.5 & UCX V1.3A
From:         Liz Moreau <EMOREAU@UMASSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: post-election thoughts

>All those abortions _are_ a terrible thing. But if you only choose
>your candidate on this criterion, you neglect your duty of exercising
>your judgment on other social issues! Even the Devil might be against
>abortion to reach his goals (this is only to give an extreme example,
>not to offend those who voted for Bush because of personal conviction).

I personally don't agree with a lot Bush has/hasn't done.  BUT I felt
convicted by the Holy Spirit to vote for him based on his abortion
stance and based on different family values.  It wasn't so much what
he has done in these areas, but what Clinton has proposed to do and
I'm sure will do.  In regards to abortion, I felt that if I voted for
Clinton, I would be held personally responsible for the murders that
will be committed on judgement day.

					Liz Moreau
From: amanda@INTERCON.COM (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Ordination of Women -- Inter Insigniores -- Part 2 of 2
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:29:29 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: InterCon TCP/Connect II 1.1b15

"John R. Covert 12-Nov-1992 0814" <covert@COVERT.ENET.DEC.COM> writes:
> We can hope that cooler heads will prevail, and that England will
> establish an organization similar to the Episcopal Synod of America and
> allow it to operate as a Church within the Church, with non-geographic
> dioceses serving parishes which would otherwise leave the unity of the
> church.

I fail to see how forming a "Church within the Church" promotes unity.
While I understand the motivations of groups like the ESA (at least, as far
as it is possible for someone who does not share those motivations), I find
their approach somewhat inconsistent.  Fracturing the diocesan structure,
whether by secession or by "internal schism", still consitutes leaving the
body of the church (and for those in orders, breaking the vows they took at
their ordination).  When you take a vow to conform to the discipline and
doctrine of the church, and the authority of your ordinary, it doesn't just
apply to those issues in which you agree--if it did, those vows would be
superfluous.  It is precisely when division threatens that the unity of the
presbyterate and episcopate is vital to the unity of the church itself,
whatever anyone's private opinions on the matter may be...

> We know (if we believe the Bible to be truth) that it is Our Lord's will
> that we should all be one, even as he is one with the Father.  This
> means that either the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Churches have to
> accept the ordination of women, or the Anglican Communion has to abandon
> it.

This is a circular argument, on its face--if each must wait for the others to
act, we end up in deadlock resulting in no action at all :).  However, on a
more serious level, are you claiming that this must happen simultaneously?
To my mind, this drama is far from being played out.  There is at least as
much pressure within the Roman and Orthodox churches; one difference, as I
see it, is that by their doctrine and structure the various churches are able
to consider the issue at varying speeds.


Peace,

Amanda Walker
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:12:14 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Nov. 15

                    Sunday, November 15, 1992
                       Thirty-third Sunday

Malachi 3:19-20                                 Psalm 98
II Thessalonians 3:7-12                         Luke 21:5-19

                  MARANATHA!  COME, LORD JESUS!

"He comes to rule the earth;  He will rule the world with justice and the
 peoples with equity." --Psalm 98:9

    As we near the end of the year we come a year nearer to the end of the
world.  "The world as we know it is passing away" (I Cor 7:31).  Jesus said:
"Nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom.  There will be
great earthquakes, plagues, and famines in various places--and in the sky
fearful omens and great signs.  But before any of this they will manhandle
and persecute you" (Lk 21:10-12).  "All will hate you because of me, yet not
a hair of your head will be harmed.  By patient endurance you will save your
lives" (Lk 21:17-19).  "Lo, the day is coming, blazing like an oven, when all
the proud and all evildoers will be stubble" (Mal 3:20).  Marantha!
(I Cor 16:22)  Come, Lord Jesus!


Prayer:  Father, by evangelization, repentance, and intercession may I hasten
         the end of the world and Jesus' coming.

Promise: "I bid you resolve not to worry about your defense beforehand, for I
          will give you words and a wisdom which none of your adversaries can
          take exception to or contradict."  Lk 21:14-15

Praise:  Praise Jesus, returning soon!  Alleluia!
-----
From "One Bread, One Body", reproduced with permission.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: bdboyle@erenj.com (Bryan D. Boyle)
Subject: Re: Altar Girls Documentation
Organization: Exxon Research and Engineering Co., NJ
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:26:10 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.170739.19720@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> bobv@spike.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Bob von Buelow) writes:
>In article <1992Nov9.152451.29288@erenj.com> bdboyle@erenj.com (Bryan D. Boyle) writes:
>> ...
>>egregarious abuse of both the rite of the eucharist and the rubrics
>>of the Catholic Church is, in my estimation a grave matter.  That is 
>>why I seperate the Roman Catholics from the American Catholic churches.
>
>This ignores the fact that girl altar servers are also common in Europe.


Familiarity breeds contempt.  Common disobedience does not make a 
practice right.  I am not ignoring the fact, although, as an American,
I have to say I am more concerned with _our_ problems than Europe's 
at this point.  Illicit activities are illicit.

>
>>won't know that they should provide the responses.  But, you see, that 
>>means that the person in charge of the acolytes has to actually
>>understand what is required of him.  And actually has to understand what
>                                ^^^
>Unfortnately, it is not allowed to be a 'him' in our diocese, due to the
>obvious indiscressions in the news.  Altar server trainer must be female
>pastoral staff member in our diocese.  Fact of life.  I say unfortunate
>not because females are trainers, but because of the situation that led
>to this.
>

Agreed.  You want to see problems that have dramatically changed
organizations, take a look at the Boy Scouts, Civil Air Patrol cadet
program, or, as you stated, the altar server trainers.
From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici)
Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: Just War (long)
Date: 5 Nov 92 6:10:32 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems

dah@tk5 (David Harwood @ University of Oulu, Department of Electrical Engineering, Finland) once wrote....
>
>(I do not konw of *any* Church Father, or early bishop, or Saint or
>Theologian who claimed any revelation of God that would justify
>warfare. 


What would you say about Augustine's comments about just war?


----
         John Covici
          covici@ccs.covici.com

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:51:45 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Nov. 14

                    Saturday, November 14, 1992

III John 5-8                Psalm 112                   Luke 18:1-8

                         REFUSING MONEY

"They are accepting nothing from the pagans." --III John 7

    If a non-Christian presented your church with $1000, would you accept it?
I don't know a church that wouldn't, except one, John's church.

    When unbelievers don't get their donations accepted, what do they think?
They're shocked. They've never seen anyone refuse money. They come to realize
that Christians are different, possibly crazy.  Then unbelievers would probably
ask us questions.  We would respond not by talking about money but about Jesus.
Unbelievers may or may not agree with us, but they would have to take us
seriously.  Many of them would become Christians.

    If your church didn't accept money from outsiders, what would the church's
members have to do?  They'd have to obey God by tithing and giving alms to the
church.  They'd have to be strongly committed to the church's mission.  With
such a high level of commitment, your church would have deeper worship,
more extensive ministry, and closer fellowship.

    If we didn't take funds from outsiders and took care of our business
in-house, we would lead many people to Christ and raise the church's level
of commitment.  Do you have the faith to do this?


Prayer:  Father, "give us today our daily bread" (Mt 6:11).

Promise: "Will not God then do justice to His chosen who call out to Him day
          and night?  Will He delay long over them, do you suppose?  I tell
          you, He will give them swift justice.  But when the Son of Man comes,
          will He find any faith on the earth?"  Lk 18:7-8

Praise:  Kim admitted she had a problem with alcohol.  Jesus freed her
         through AA.
-----
From "One Bread, One Body", reproduced with permission.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: The American University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sat, 7 Nov 1992 09:29:14 EST
From:         Jim McIntosh <JIM@AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Homosexuality
              6 Nov 1992 09:31:17 -0500 from <ewanco@MLO.DEC.COM>

On Fri, 6 Nov 1992 09:31:17 -0500 Eric James Ewanco (who I usually
respect even if I don't agree with) said:
>Case studies show the psychological, emotional, and spiritual damage
>suffered by homosexuals who indulge their inclinations.  It leads to
>despair  and a desire that can never be satisfied.  Homosexuals are
>almost never happy, and I don't believe these negative things are
>entirely due to societal influences.  The answer is not "accepting your
>lifestyle."  Homosexuals tend always to be deeply wounded individuals
>with tormented souls; the more they indulge, the worse it becomes.

Eric James, can you cite those studies? My experience is almost exactly
the opposite, and I'd love to examine these studys you say prove your
case.

>I believe that homosexuals can only find peace by rejecting the
>homosexual lifestyle (i.e. homosexual sex) and living either celibately
>or in a marital relationship with a member of the opposite sex, if that
>is possible.  (For some, it is; others are revolted by the thought.)

As you probably know, but seem to ignore, homosexuality is an unchosen
way of being. Whether nature or nurture, one's sexual orientation seems
set by early childhood. What are you asking for then? You are asking that
someone who is capable only of loving someone of his or her own sex
reject the "lifestyle" (whatever that means) and marry someone who he or
she is not attracted. You are asking this person to fake a love for this
other person and, in effect, live a lie. The person who they marry is
condemned to a horrible life. What if after twenty years of marriage the
gay person decides that enough is enough and breaks out of the terrible
trap into which you've lead them? Where does that place the poor spouse
or unlucky children? This "solution" of yours seems fraught with danger
and almost evil.

You've now not only denied the gay person a true and lasting love, but
you've tormented a poor and innocent spouse and possibly children! If
anything "leads to despair and a desire that can never be satisfied" it
seems to me that your solution would be it. I can see how "homosexuals
are almost never happy" if this is the life you have planned for them.

Jim McIntosh, SFO (jim@american.edu)
The American University
Washington DC 20016-8019 USA
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:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:32:46 -0700
From:         "(Gordon C. Zaft)" <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG>
Subject:      Ariz Prop 110

On Nov 4,  3:20pm, noao!mayo@CS.UTK.EDU wrote:
} Subject: Re:  Calif. Prop 161
} The word here in Tennessee is that it failed, but I think we would all
} prefer to hear it from someone in California.
}
} Gordon, how did things go in Arizona?
}-- End of excerpt from noao!mayo@CS.UTK.EDU

Final vote was 68.1% against, 30% for.  While disappointed, I guess
a factor that should be remembered is that there was a larger-than
usual turnout which probably hurt its chances (since the additional
turnout almost undoubtedly voted against the proposition).

	We'll keep working.

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.
Everyone is enthusiastic about your work.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: The American University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sat, 7 Nov 1992 10:04:58 EST
From:         Jim McIntosh <JIM@AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Women's ordination yet again *sigh*
              6 Nov 1992 14:21:14 -0700 from <zaft@CARITAS.COTDAZR.ORG>

On Fri, 6 Nov 1992 14:21:14 -0700 (Gordon C. Zaft) said:
>	I'm not putting this very well.  A bishop could attempt to confect
>grape juice and honey-nut bread into the Body and Blood of Christ, but he
>could not do it.  It's not in its nature.

What is it that causes the bread and wine to become the Body and Blood of
Jesus? Is it the bread? The wine? Does the priest cause it to happen?
Perhaps the magic words?

No, of course not. God does it. God chooses to do it. God has promised to
do it... at least when done by a priest using bread and wine. Does this
prevent God from doing it at other times? No, again, of course not. God
can choose to do what God wants to do. All the church can say that it
feels assured that when a validly ordained priest says the eucharistic
prayer with bread and wine it will happen.

Does this stop God from doing it with the grape juice and honey-nut
bread? No, of course not. It was God who chose the bread and the wine in
the first place, and God can certainly choose what God wants to
transform. All the church can say, is that it can't be sure what happened
when that poor bishop said the mass with the grape juice and honey-nut
bread. There is no assurance that it became Jesus's Body and Blood. But
the church also can't say with any certainty that it didn't. That would
be limiting God's power.

I think this has tremendous implications as the priests start dying of
old age and priestless parishes become the norm. When the people gather
to celebrate the Eucharist without a priest there may be no assurance
that the bread and wine will become the Body and Blood of Christ, but the
possibility exists.

Jim McIntosh, SFO (jim@american.edu)
The American University
Washington DC 20016-8019 USA
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sat, 7 Nov 1992 10:42:27 -0500
From:         Eric James Ewanco <ewanco@MLO.DEC.COM>
Subject:      Re: Nature of List--Fossil

Ack! John O., you're frustrating me.

I am NOT suggesting that the church was at any time in error, pre- or post-
Vatican II.

But John, I am sure you will agree that as a human organization, *IGNORING
DOGMATIC PRONOUNCEMENTS*, there are elements of the church that wander off
into the wrong direction.  If people of the church (is THAT better? ;-))
always did what was right, there would be no need for ecumenical councils,
right?

Take the Arian heresy.  I could say that the church headed straight down
the path of heresy, because a rather large proportion of its bishops believed
Arius.  Now when I say that I do not mean the church as a whole speaking
infallibly was heretical, but that the minds of the people who made up the
church headed into the wrong direction.  Now.  Keeping this example in mind,
I think that the way the faith was lived out both pre- and post-SVC has been
off the ideal.  I think certain things have been wrongly emphasized in both
situations.  For example, the church did some very wrong things in the period
leading up to the Reformation.  These things were not right, but the church
did them.  Hence the church was, in a sense, off the right path, not the
Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (i.e. the one the gates of Hell would never
prevail against), but rather the human beings who make up the Church.

I think the pre-SVC church lacked a lot of love and charity.  I think that
sacred Scripture was not emphasized as it should have been, I think that
evangelism was not emphasized as it should have been, and I think that it
acted legalistically in an unhealthy way.  I think of nuns who picked children
up by their ears and beat them for the smallest infractions, and nuns who
generally exhibited not one whit of the Gospel.  Basically, I think that in
day-to-day living, the true Catholic Faith was not been lived out as it should
have been.

Hope that clarifies,
Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:48:08 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Nov. 7

    		    Saturday, November 7, 1992

Philippians 4:10-19 	    Psalm 112		  Luke 16:9-15

	      	      	NEEDING TO GIVE

"You sent something for my needs, not once but twice." --Philippians 4:16

    Paul told the Philippians that receiving money from them gave him great
joy, but not because he needed the money (Phil 4:10-11).  Paul had learned
to be self-sufficient, and cope with anything (Phil 4:11-12).  Therefore,
he was not in want and not eager for the Philippians' monetary gift, but he
was concerned for them to balance their account and pay for the service He
gave them (Phil 4:17).

    Paul gave the impression that the Church doesn't need money, but people
need to give money.  The Church is doing us a favor by taking up a  collection.
We should  be grateful to the Church for letting us give money for God's
work.  We should be begging the Church insistently for the favor of giving
up our money (II Cor 8:4).

    Are we in the same Church that Paul belonged to?  Our churches say they
are in need.  We think we're doing the Church a favor when we give.  We're
tempted not to give; we're not tempted to give too much (see II Cor 8:12).
Does Paul know something we don't know?  Is our relationship with Christ
different than his?


Prayer:  Father, may I give to your Church as never before.

Promise: "Make friends for yourselves through your use of this world's
	  goods, so that when they fail you, a lasting reception will be
	  yours."  Lk 16:9

Praise:  Alex was freed by Jesus from the sin of masturbation.

-----
From "One Bread, One Body", reproduced with permission.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: bobv@spike.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Bob von Buelow)
Subject: Re: Altar Girls Documentation
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:28:01 GMT

bdboyle@erenj.com (Bryan D. Boyle) writes:
>
>Familiarity breeds contempt.  Common disobedience does not make a 
>practice right.  I am not ignoring the fact, although, as an American,
>I have to say I am more concerned with _our_ problems than Europe's 
>at this point.  ...
>

Well I guess I take a more of a 'spaceship earth' and brotherhood of
all a bit more seriously.  What is happening in the church in Europe and
Africa and China are just as important to me as what is happening in
New York and indeed in Rome.  We are all members of this church and we
should be all concerned with each other.  Brothers and sisters all.

Bob
--
Bob von Buelow             Mars Observer Planning and Sequencing Element
bobv@spike.jpl.nasa.gov          - standard disclaimers apply -
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 11:08:59 EST
From:         "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support,
              x8425" <tillman@SWDEV.SI.COM>
Subject:      RE: Proper scope of Science (WAS Bellarmine on Galileo5

Marty Helgesen (mnhcc@cunyvm.cuny.edu) writes:

>In the same way, if a bishop were to ordain a woman (baptized or unbaptized,
>nothing would happen.  She would not be a priest, but there is no way we could
>prove this by scientific experimentation.

So, you don't believe that Jesus told the truth then when he said "What you bind
on earth will be bound in heaven and what you loose on earth will be loosed in
heaven." do you?  Here, he wasn't speaking only to Peter.  He spoke to all the
apostles.  Now, the bishops are the successors of the apostles and as such each,
in their own right, has the authority conveyed by Jesus in the above statement.
Thus, if a bishop ordains anyone, be it man or woman, baptised or not, *it will
be valid* by the authority given him (or her!) by God.

-----------------------------+--------------------------------
 Brian Tillman               | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com
 Smiths Industries, Inc.     |           tillman_brian@si.com
 4141 Eastern Ave., MS129    | Hey, I said this stuff myself.
 Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it.
-----------------------------+--------------------------------
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic