HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 15:42:24 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Jan 29

                    Friday, January 29, 1993

Hebrews 10:32-39            Psalm 37            Mark 4:26-34

                        SPIRITUAL SUICIDE?

"Do not, then, surrender your confidence; it will have great reward."
 --Hebrews 10:25

Satan is trying to get us to surrender our confidence, to draw back
(Heb 10:38-39), to give up, to commit spiritual suicide.  To keep the faith,
we have to endure "a great contest of suffering" (Heb 10:32).  This contest
lasts a long time.  Relief in our sufferings seems indefinitely delayed (see
Heb 10:37).  Any benefits from our sufferings seem to be invisible or
negligible.  Under these circumstances, we naturally feel like giving up.
Satan will even let us give up without appearing to give up everything.
He'll let us keep the trappings of Christianity as long as we're lukewarm
in our commitment to Jesus (see Rv 3:16).  So it's very easy to give up and
not even look bad to other Christians.

How many church-goers are just going through the motions?  How many spouses
are divorced in heart and spirit although not on paper?  How many parents
have long ago given up discipling their children?  How many churches have
given up on trying to evangelize?  If you've given up on life and on God,
repent.  The Lord will take you back.  If you're keeping the faith but
wondering how long you'll have to suffer, fix your eyes on Jesus, and you
will rejoice in the measure you suffer for Him (I Pt 4:13).


Prayer:  Father, may my faith move mountains and not vice versa (see Mt 17:20).

Promise: "Take delight in the Lord, and He will grant you your heart's
          requests."  Ps 37:4

Praise:  Mary and the disciples kept praying until they were open to receive
         the Spirit.
-----
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, October 15, 1992.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:02:36 -0500
From:         URSIC@ALF.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Re: Origins

"Stephen A. Creps" <creps@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU> writes:
>Well, since I'm being "queued" I'll see what I can find to respond to.
Here, Steve, here!!! Thomas wrote:
"I accept observable facts, and deductive and inductive logic."
And you were supposed to respond...well, I guess you don't believe in
transubstantiation since Christ's real presence can't be logically or
inductively deduced from the observable facts.

But since you failed to take your queue, I have no recourse but to
file a discrimination claim against you. Of course, I'd be willing
to settle out of court for a couple kazillion bucks:-) Hmmm, on second
thought, maybe I'd better increase that, I'm going to have to put
three kids through college in a few years.

>   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?

Point taken, however, genetic engineering is a far cry from spontaneous
generation which Thomas seems to be claiming as plausible. - J.J.
From: mfulsmb@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Martin Barry)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re:      RE: Why is it?
Date: 25 Jan 93 11:22:11 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre, Manchester, England, M13 9PL.

In article <1993Jan21.155037.22000@cs.tulane.edu> lang@cs.tulane.edu (Raymond Lang) writes:
>I could be wrong, but I thought Epiphany got moved to a Sunday
>only in the U.S. and Canada.  My understanding was that Epiphany
>remains a Holy Day of Obligation on Jan. 6 in Central and South
>American countries.

Here Epiphany was on a Wednesday this year. It gets moved to Sunday if it
falls on a Monday or a Saturday (likewise Corpus Christi, SS Peter and Paul
and others, I think.) I am not making this up.

Martin "no relation" Barry.
From: mfulsmb@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Martin Barry)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: The Real Presence
Date: 28 Jan 93 10:06:15 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre, Manchester, England, M13 9PL.

In article <C1F8zz.GnG@news.udel.edu> 15942@brahms.udel.edu (Stephen Barr) writes:
:       Martin, I am not a philosopher. I cannot hold my
: own with you in that field.

Me neither. Half the time I don't understand what I'm talking about.

[Steve then gives a definition of the blessed sacrament: no longer bread,
truly the body of Christ.] 

I agree entirely with your definition.

:       That is all I think the Church means to commit
: herself to. Perhaps the T word does historically mean
: more that. But I do not think the Church means to commit 
: herself to Aristotelian categories.

Yes, here too I agree entirely. But this runs counter to a 'fundamentalist'
reading of the Council of Trent.

:      In particular, why not conceive of it as an optical
: illusion? I do not say that that is the best way or only
: way or the correct way. Only that it is *a* way that 
: would preserve (a), (b), and (c), and therefore that a
: Catholic could hold and say he was totally orthodox.

I suppose I have misgivings because 'optical illusion' has connotations of
deception, or hallucination, or of superficiality. The fact is that it's an
'illusion' that the senses cannot see through, no matter how hard one tries
not to be 'deceived'. Now I think about it, I suppose an 'illusion' is not
far from what was in the mind of the author of _adoro te devote_: "sight,
touch and taste in thee are each deceived, the ear alone most truly is
believed; I believe all the son of God has spoken: than truth's own word
there is no truer token" (or something like that). But I'm not madly
enthusiastic about the idea of God performing conjuring tricks!

: I have a problem with the idea that there is anything
: to bread or any purely physical phenomenon beyond the
: complete description of how it interacts with the rest
: of the world (actually I would have to qualify that a little)
: So what 'departs' if anything upon consecration leaves me
: puzzled. I choose to profess a blessed agnosticism on that
: point. 

Me too.

:       My main point is that the Church does not seek to
: explain "how" or to impose Aristotelian ideas as de fide.
: The distinction between trans and con does not involve
: all that. It seems to me that consubstantiation (as 
: rejected by the Church) would be a theory that allowed
: one to say "this is still bread" or even "Christ's
: body is present, but so is the piece of bread".

Agreed.

:       I hope we don't argue on this one, Martin, because
: I haven't the philosophical equipment to do so. Indeed,
: I will leave you in possession of the field here.

You're a wise man. (1 Tim 6:20-21). In any case I'm afraid we agree
virtually entirely.

Martin Barry.
From: mcm@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: directions
Date: 28 Jan 93 08:45:32 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <C1Jor9.FB@unix.portal.com>, zerucha@shell.portal.com (Thomas E Zerucha) wri> 
> The only reason I see for being a Catholic v.s. anything else at the
> cafeteria is that we have held fast to the faith entrusted to us.  We
One of the reasons that I am interested in converting because I see that the
teachings effect the behaviors of us all every day.
From: aiden@NCoast.ORG (Steven Otlowski)
Subject: Re: The Real Presence
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:56:12 GMT



God is Really and Actually present everywhere.




Steve Otlowski-
From: mfulsmb@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Martin Barry)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: ?
Date: 22 Jan 93 10:21:26 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre, Manchester, England, M13 9PL.

In article <C15y6G.M6A@acsu.buffalo.edu> v201lrxa@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (L'Angelo Misterioso) writes:
>
>	Anyone know about St. SImon Stock? I have a scapular with his
>picture on one side, and a picture of Our Lady of Mount Carmel on 
>the other side.

His relics are venerated at Aylesford Priory (about thirty miles south-east
of London, in Kent, in England), a Carmelite Priory which re-opened for
business some time earlier in this century, after suffering under Henry
VIII's dissolution of the monasteries. I haven't been there in fifteen
years, so my recollections are very hazy, but I think St Simon Stock had
visions of the blessed virgin that inspired him to found (?)the priory,
(?)the order(?) or something.

Martin Barry.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 16:05:53 -0500
From:         mayo@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject:      "One Bread, One Body", Jan 31

                    Sunday, January 31, 1993

Zephaniah 2:3, 3:12-13                          Psalm 146
I Corinthians 1:26-31                           Matthew 5:1-12

                          REMNANT DAYS

"But I will leave as a remnant in your midst a people humble and lowly, who
 shall take refuge in the name of the Lord; the remnant of Israel."
 --Zephaniah 3:12-13

Zephaniah and Isaiah prophesied that, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the
Babylonians, the Lord would leave a remnant.  These prophets also implied the
Lord would leave a remnant not only during the Babylonian exile but throughout
the history of Christianity.  This gives the impression that only a minority
of people would be committed Christians at any particular time.

Jesus seems to have spoken similarly when he said that many are called but few
are chosen (Mt 22:14).  When asked if few were to be saved, Jesus did not
directly answer that question (Lk 13:23), but He did say that many were on the
road to damnation and few on the road to eternal life (Mt 7:13-14).

Cardinal Newman commented on this Scripture passage by saying that, although
he couldn't know exactly what Jesus meant by "many" and "few", he could
safely say that "few" weren't more than "many" and "many" weren't less than
"few".  This is a sobering thought.  If we fit into this world, if we're like
most people, if we have the same habits, buy the same things, and watch the
same shows, wee may be on the road to damnation.


Prayer:  Father, may I be "out of this world" (Jn 15:19).

Promise: "God chose those whom the world considers absurd to shame the wise; He
          singled out the weak of this world to shame the strong."  I Cor 1:27

Praise:  Richard repented of homosexual activity, and Jesus forgave and freed
         him.
-----
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, October 15, 1992.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:22:33 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Re: Origins

jww@EVOLVING.COM writes:
>This is still a far cry, though, from some beast's mutating into bats,
>whales, kangaroos, giraffes, and men in only a few million generations.

_Only_ a "few million generations"?!  As they say, Father, "Time, time,
time, ... is on our side, yes it is" - J.J.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:00:00 CST
From:         ASDXMHK@MVS.UCC.OKSTATE.EDU
Subject:      Educational Requirements for Permanent Deacons

Don,
  The formation program for the permanent deaconate requires
3 hours of tutored instruction each week (ideal).  The candidate
also is expected to attend at least 1 retreat during each year
of study.  The Tulsa program has four weekend sessions, each of
which deal with certain specific topics (ie. moral theology,
ethics and etc.), each year.  We also meet for 8 days during each
summer of the 3 year formation program and cover other such
topics as sacraments and etc. in depth. I can add additional
info if requested.
*
Mike Kerntke
Oklahoma State University
asdxmhk@osucc
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
From: creps@nickel.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re: pius xii on evolution
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:50:01 GMT

In article <1k6ue7INNj1k@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu> rrrodrig@psc.lsa.umich.edu (Ricardo R. Rodriquiz) writes:
>:         When, however, there is question of another conjectural
>:      opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church
>:      by no means enjoy such liberty....
>:      Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion [polygenism]
>:      can be reconciled with [the dogma of original sin].
>
>Not having a proper dictionary of theological or philosophical terms,
>would someone out there be kind enough to define polygenism.  Many
>thanks.

   Polygenism is the idea that Man descended from several first human
beings.  It is opposed to the idea of the entire human race descending
from only one pair of humans, whom we usually give the names Adam and
Eve.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Apparently-To: catholic@american.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 10:48:22 PST
From:         "Greg Wolff, MISG, MSO1-1/J50,
              dtn 223-0855 21-Jan-1993 1338" <wolff@WAYHIP.ENET.DEC.COM>
Subject:      ignorance, pride, and homosexual acts

    What follows is a little flowery for our modern taste, but I think that
    the point comes across.  It is the Apostolic See, the magisterium of
    the Church of Jesus Christ, that teaches us in "the way of love," the
    Way of Jesus Christ.

<begin quoted text>

    Now those who think they need no teacher, or those who do not believe
    those who teach them in the way of love, are afflicted with the disease
    of ignorance, which is the mother of overweening pride.  They are
    preceded in the way of destruction by those who have fallen from the
    heavenly path, the demons who fly about in the air, having left their
    heavenly teachers.  For words and syllables do not constitute teaching
    -- sometimes those who possess these are disreputable in the extreme --
    but teaching consists of virtuous acts of conduct, of freedom from
    injuriousness, of dauntlessness, and of an even temper.  To all this
    add an intrepidity which produces words like flames of fire.

    For if this were not so, the Great Teacher would not have told his
    disciples: "Learn of me, because I am meek and humble of heart."  He
    did not use fine language when teaching them, but he required rather
    the formation of their character, causing grief only to those who hate
    the word and teachers as well.  For the soul being trained to act in
    accord with God's plan must either learn faithfully what it does not
    know, or teach clearly what it does know.

<end quoted text>

    [taken from:
        Palladius, Letter to Lausus 2-3, in "The Lausiac History," trans.
        Robert T. Meyer, Ancient Christian Writers 34 (New York: Newman
        Press, 1964), pp. 21-22.]

                                                    In Christ the Savior

                                                    Greg Wolff
                                                    wolff@ics.enet.dec.com
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:00:32 MST
From:         jww@EVOLVING.COM
Subject:      Re: Origins
              93 2:43 am

Thomas Zerucha asks:
> Mutation and Speciation are only distantly related.  Most mutations occur
> within species.  If you have enough mutations you may end up with a group
> that cannot interbreed with the original.  Out of curiosity, do you have
> an example of this (citation)?
>
> You are the one stating that mutation produces new species.  However in the
> case of domesticated mammals, I don't think that any new species have been
> found, even though the breeders were isolating mutation and selecting for
> differences.  As far as I know, a Yorkie and a Greyhound can have viable
> offspring.

But St. Bernards and Great Danes can't -- they're infertile together.
If all the other dogs died, we'd have two species (according to the
fertility-group definition).  This is still a far cry, though, from
some beast's mutating into bats, whales, kangaroos, giraffes, and men
in only a few million generations.

It goes the other way, too.  Suppose you killed off all the world's
raspberries and blackberries -- there would still be boysenberries,
and we'd have an example of two species' becoming one.

-- Fr. John Woolley
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CATHOLIC@AMERICAN.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 13:27:14 -0500
From:         URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM
Subject:      Re: condemnation of homosexual acts is (un)necessary...

"Greg Wolff, MISG, ICS::, MSO1-1/J50" <wolff@ICS.ENET.DEC.COM> writes:
>    J.J. (URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM) writes:
>>...you would have no objection to a chaste homosexual in the military, while
>>you would perhaps favor rules dispelling un-chaste heterosexuals? - J.J.

>    Finally, your question shows that you are beginning to get the point.

Perhaps you will understand mine now, also:-)

>    A chaste homosexual is no different than a chaste heterosexual.  It is
>    the ACTS that are condemned.

Then what's all the fuss about people admitting that they are homosexuals?

>    Neither you nor I are able to look at a person and say "this person has
>    some innate desire for same-sex-relations and that this other person
>    has some innate desire for other-sex-relations."  It is invisible!
>    What is visible is the ACT of (same|other) sex relations.

So as long as they keep their ACTs between themselves and God, why should
we show more concern for homosexual acts than we do for heterosexual
acts performed out of wedlock. The uproar about admitting homosexuals
into the military seems discriminatory since the same uproar isn't
seen for admitting unchaste heterosexuals.

>    It is the visible ACTIONS of people that are contrary to God's
>    Commandments that are condemned.

Yes, but let's just be fair about spreading the condemnation:-) -J.J.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:05:05 -0600
From:         Joel Neisen <joel@MSC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: condemnation of homosexual acts is (un)necessary...

> Unless you say you are a chaste homosexual. Do you actually think that
>if you told the recruiter that you were a chaste homosexual, that they
> would allow you to enlist? - J.J.

If you told them you were a chaste heterosexual the sergeant
at the enlistment center probably wouldn't want to you join either  :-)

Actually I do know of one instance of an Air Force pilot
showing up for duty (in Thailand) _almost_ being court martialed
for being a chaste heterosexual.  (His C.O. had ordered him to live
off base with a prostitute, like the other pilots, the pilot in
question stood his ground because of his Christianity).

joel
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Missouri-Columbia Campus Computing, 314-882-2000
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 09:35:18 CST
From:         CCCAMPER@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Subject:      RE: The Real Presence
              22 Jan 1993 15:31:09 -0500 from <URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM>

On Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:31:09 -0500 <URSIC@ASTRO.CS.HH.AB.COM> said:
>
>Yes, I suppose it's just a habit I have of never passing up an
>opportunity to take a shot at this particular sexist tradition:-)

At what you perceive as a "sexist tradition".
>
>>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.
>
>OK, I found it quite unbelievable, the opportunity for fraud could
>not be ruled out as I would doubt the traceability of the evidence.
>Changing bread and wine into flesh is not so unbelievable as our
>own bodies do it all the time. That God would single out this
>particular priest for this spontaneous event, and also chose to
>make it a piece of His heart (how romantic) seems a bit far-fetched.
>I'd classify it along with the shroud, as another forgery.

So you choose to pass judgement before ever studying the matter?
Seems rather narrow minded, it could be a great help to your faith.
>
>If He really wanted to make people believe in the Church's pet
>theory on transubstantiation, He'd single out some Sunday and have

He has done this many Sundays in history. Just the case I mentioned
is the best documented and verifiable. Why don't you read about it?

>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.

Frankly, Jesus is too Holy in my heart and understanding to laugh at this
'humor'. I'm sorry, but it offends me.

In Christ,
Elizabeth
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.0.4 1/31/90)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 09:40:56 HST
From:         Len Howard <tas@PEGASUS.COM>
Subject:      Re: Deacons and their academic requirements
              requirements" (Jan 21, 11:18am)

Don, all I can tell you is that there are no prerequesite academic
requirements to enter the diaconate training program here in Hawaii,
and the academic program oed by the Diocesan Institute is a three year
part-time program with 8 hours each month of class and multiple
papers.  This is the program for permanent deacon, not transitional.

Shalom,                               Len Howard
From: tak@tazboy.jpl.nasa.gov (Tom Kreitzberg)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.catholic
Subject: Re: philosophical tenable-ness of the Christian religion...
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:01:30
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: tazboy.jpl.nasa.gov
In-reply-to: "Greg Wolff, MISG, ICS::,
              MSO1-1/J50 25-Jan-1993 1024"'s message of Mon, 25 Jan 1993 07:33:03 PST

In article <9301251533.AA22356@enet-gw.pa.dec.com> "Greg Wolff, MISG, ICS::,
              MSO1-1/J50 25-Jan-1993 1024" <wolff@ICS.ENET.DEC.COM> writes:

> But, in this sense, to the mind of the purely rational person the
> entire Christian religion turns out to be "philosophically untenable."
>
> A clear example of this are the works of Mortimer Adler.  While he
> works out what he believes is a better philosophical proof of the
> existance of God than that of St. Thomas Aquinas, he then goes on to
> issue a scathing attack against the Christian religion on the grounds
> that it is philosophically untenable.  (See his book about "How to
> think about God" paraphrase of the title, I don't have it in front of
> me...)

What was it? "How to Think About God: A Guide for Twentieth Century
Pagans." Which should tip you off right away that it doesn't carry a
nihil obstat.

I read the book last summer. I enjoyed it. I agreed with his opinions
about the weakness of previous arguments regarding the existence of
God. I disagreed with his opinions about the strength of his own arguments
proving the existence of God; they struck me as no better than any
one else's proof. I cannot recall anything approaching a "scathing
attack against the Christian religion." I suspect it's all in how
you approach the book. I like what I've read by Adler, so I wasn't
predisposed to consider his attacks on other's proofs on any but the
logical level.

	Tom