Activism Change » Social Activism

The worth of my voice

admin — Sun, 01 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – X-No-Archive: yes One thoughtful person suggested to my husband that next time he just let me wander into traffic. that’s just so wrong peace, that group a *lot of stuff to Liz (and others) that is not only just *wrong, it’s cruel and ignorant. Yes, it was all so totally unprovoked. Yes. In many cases, with many people, it *is unprovoked. And it’s still *wrong. One person being an asshole doesn’t give license to everyone they encounter to be ans asshole. The initial asshole saying fucked up stuff is responsible for his/her stuff. The person responding (having been "provoked") is responsible for their *own stuff. I guess it’s all a matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not). KC, I have seen your responses when provoked . . . oft times when unprovoked, too. I’m sure, then, that you understand exactly how someone may not take the "high" road you advocate here. I guess I feel, too, that the person provoking should not be given smilies and a home-free card. Again, matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not in the first place). Shar

Hey Shar =) I’ve also seen my responses, and *I take 100% responsibility for *all of them. I was not so much advocating a "high road", as speaking as a person who has hurt people and been hurt by people. I’m not trying to fool myself or anyone else into believing I’ve never made nasty responses, nor am I trying to claim that I will never *again have a nasty response. I didn’t make either claim in my post. And whether it’s me being nasty or someone else being nasty I/he/she am/is responsible for my/their behaviour. Kc – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar Kc

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – X-No-Archive: yes One thoughtful person suggested to my husband that next time he just let me wander into traffic. that’s just so wrong peace, that group a *lot of stuff to Liz (and others) that is not only just *wrong, it’s cruel and ignorant. Yes, it was all so totally unprovoked. Yes. In many cases, with many people, it *is unprovoked. And it’s still *wrong. One person being an asshole doesn’t give license to everyone they encounter to be ans asshole. The initial asshole saying fucked up stuff is responsible for his/her stuff. The person responding (having been "provoked") is responsible for their *own stuff. I guess it’s all a matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not). Besides, let’s be honest: this group follows my every written word everywhere I go and comments on it no matter the content or subject matter. Nine and a half times out of ten I am not discussing them or anything involving them at all and some of the newest players there *never even met me* and never had any actual contact with me at all. They go solely on what they have been told. I don’t respect people who want to be accepted so bad they allow themselves to be so malleable. I’m not sure *which group you are referring to, I was referring to several of the BFer’s. So am I, though a couple of the Pathfinder people and at least one poster here are involved, as well. Just me, making friends and influencing people *g*

Heh. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As to being provoked, they are provoked by my very continued *existence and they’ll have to survive somehow. My daughter hits my son. I say to her ‘why did you hit him’ and she says ‘because he made me mad’. I do not say to her ‘oh, well, ok then. If he made you *mad, that’s ok’. I teach my kids that it doesn’t matter whether or not someone is trying to piss you off, you don’t get to hit them in response. Period. I don’t let my kids use ‘he made me do it’ as an excuse and I certainly don’t buy it in a group of adults. I work hard on controlling that part of my nature which would like to shoot from the hip. I don’t always succeed, but more often than not these days, I do. I’m wary of people who say they cannot control themselves or insist someone *made them do x, y or z because they made them mad. I prefer to be with people who are aware of their bullshit, can face it head on and work on it. I respect people who work hard at themselves and take responsibility for what they do. I’m unimpressed with people who can’t work hard on their issues, whatever they may be so instead focus on other people and make of those people the reason for all their troubles. I do not like people who are weak or are cowards. That’s me. Clearly, there is a niche for them out there and to each his own. Me, it isn’t my cup of tea. I archive it in case I need it later, and then I move past it. Moving past it and not freaking out about every nasty word was one of the biggest things I had to focus on when I first came to aar and I think I’ve done pretty good. And I know in my heart, rather than simply intellectually, that what I think about my progress (or lack thereof) is all that matters. There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar

Response:

KC, I have seen your responses when provoked . . . oft times when unprovoked, too. I’m sure, then, that you understand exactly how someone may not take the "high" road you advocate here. I guess I feel, too, that the person provoking should not be given smilies and a home-free card. Again, matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not in the first place). Shar – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar Kc

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – X-No-Archive: yes One thoughtful person suggested to my husband that next time he just let me wander into traffic. that’s just so wrong peace, that group a *lot of stuff to Liz (and others) that is not only just *wrong, it’s cruel and ignorant. Yes, it was all so totally unprovoked. Yes. In many cases, with many people, it *is unprovoked. And it’s still *wrong. One person being an asshole doesn’t give license to everyone they encounter to be ans asshole. The initial asshole saying fucked up stuff is responsible for his/her stuff. The person responding (having been "provoked") is responsible for their *own stuff. I guess it’s all a matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not). Besides, let’s be honest: this group follows my every written word everywhere I go and comments on it no matter the content or subject matter. Nine and a half times out of ten I am not discussing them or anything involving them at all and some of the newest players there *never even met me* and never had any actual contact with me at all. They go solely on what they have been told. I don’t respect people who want to be accepted so bad they allow themselves to be so malleable. I’m not sure *which group you are referring to, I was referring to several of the BFer’s.

So am I, though a couple of the Pathfinder people and at least one poster here are involved, as well. Just me, making friends and influencing people *g* – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As to being provoked, they are provoked by my very continued *existence and they’ll have to survive somehow. My daughter hits my son. I say to her ‘why did you hit him’ and she says ‘because he made me mad’. I do not say to her ‘oh, well, ok then. If he made you *mad, that’s ok’. I teach my kids that it doesn’t matter whether or not someone is trying to piss you off, you don’t get to hit them in response. Period. I don’t let my kids use ‘he made me do it’ as an excuse and I certainly don’t buy it in a group of adults. I work hard on controlling that part of my nature which would like to shoot from the hip. I don’t always succeed, but more often than not these days, I do. I’m wary of people who say they cannot control themselves or insist someone *made them do x, y or z because they made them mad. I prefer to be with people who are aware of their bullshit, can face it head on and work on it. I respect people who work hard at themselves and take responsibility for what they do. I’m unimpressed with people who can’t work hard on their issues, whatever they may be so instead focus on other people and make of those people the reason for all their troubles. I do not like people who are weak or are cowards. That’s me. Clearly, there is a niche for them out there and to each his own. Me, it isn’t my cup of tea. I archive it in case I need it later, and then I move past it. Moving past it and not freaking out about every nasty word was one of the biggest things I had to focus on when I first came to aar and I think I’ve done pretty good. And I know in my heart, rather than simply intellectually, that what I think about my progress (or lack thereof) is all that matters. There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – X-No-Archive: yes One thoughtful person suggested to my husband that next time he just let me wander into traffic. that’s just so wrong peace, that group a *lot of stuff to Liz (and others) that is not only just *wrong, it’s cruel and ignorant. Yes, it was all so totally unprovoked. Yes. In many cases, with many people, it *is unprovoked. And it’s still *wrong. One person being an asshole doesn’t give license to everyone they encounter to be ans asshole. The initial asshole saying fucked up stuff is responsible for his/her stuff. The person responding (having been "provoked") is responsible for their *own stuff. I guess it’s all a matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not). Besides, let’s be honest: this group follows my every written word everywhere I go and comments on it no matter the content or subject matter. Nine and a half times out of ten I am not discussing them or anything involving them at all and some of the newest players there *never even met me* and never had any actual contact with me at all. They go solely on what they have been told. I don’t respect people who want to be accepted so bad they allow themselves to be so malleable.

I’m not sure *which group you are referring to, I was referring to several of the BFer’s. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As to being provoked, they are provoked by my very continued *existence and they’ll have to survive somehow. My daughter hits my son. I say to her ‘why did you hit him’ and she says ‘because he made me mad’. I do not say to her ‘oh, well, ok then. If he made you *mad, that’s ok’. I teach my kids that it doesn’t matter whether or not someone is trying to piss you off, you don’t get to hit them in response. Period. I don’t let my kids use ‘he made me do it’ as an excuse and I certainly don’t buy it in a group of adults. I work hard on controlling that part of my nature which would like to shoot from the hip. I don’t always succeed, but more often than not these days, I do. I’m wary of people who say they cannot control themselves or insist someone *made them do x, y or z because they made them mad. I prefer to be with people who are aware of their bullshit, can face it head on and work on it. I respect people who work hard at themselves and take responsibility for what they do. I’m unimpressed with people who can’t work hard on their issues, whatever they may be so instead focus on other people and make of those people the reason for all their troubles. I do not like people who are weak or are cowards. That’s me. Clearly, there is a niche for them out there and to each his own. Me, it isn’t my cup of tea. I archive it in case I need it later, and then I move past it. Moving past it and not freaking out about every nasty word was one of the biggest things I had to focus on when I first came to aar and I think I’ve done pretty good. And I know in my heart, rather than simply intellectually, that what I think about my progress (or lack thereof) is all that matters. There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar Kc

Response:

Besides, let’s be honest: this group follows my every written word everywhere I go and comments on it no matter the content or subject matter. Nine and a half times out of ten I am not discussing them or anything involving them at all and some of the newest players there *never even met me* and never had any actual contact with me at all. They go solely on what they have been told. I don’t respect people who want to be accepted so bad they allow themselves to be so malleable. As to being provoked, they are provoked by my very continued *existence and they’ll have to survive somehow. My daughter hits my son. I say to her ‘why did you hit him’ and she says ‘because he made me mad’. I do not say to her ‘oh, well, ok then. If he made you *mad, that’s ok’. I teach my kids that it doesn’t matter whether or not someone is trying to piss you off, you don’t get to hit them in response. Period. I don’t let my kids use ‘he made me do it’ as an excuse and I certainly don’t buy it in a group of adults. I work hard on controlling that part of my nature which would like to shoot from the hip. I don’t always succeed, but more often than not these days, I do. I’m wary of people who say they cannot control themselves or insist someone *made them do x, y or z because they made them mad. I prefer to be with people who are aware of their bullshit, can face it head on and work on it. I respect people who work hard at themselves and take responsibility for what they do. I’m unimpressed with people who can’t work hard on their issues, whatever they may be so instead focus on other people and make of those people the reason for all their troubles. I do not like people who are weak or are cowards. That’s me. Clearly, there is a niche for them out there and to each his own. Me, it isn’t my cup of tea. I archive it in case I need it later, and then I move past it. Moving past it and not freaking out about every nasty word was one of the biggest things I had to focus on when I first came to aar and I think I’ve done pretty good. And I know in my heart, rather than simply intellectually, that what I think about my progress (or lack thereof) is all that matters. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar Kc

Response:

There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Kc

Response:

i’m not sure that’s always the case. I think that literally, you cannot change a thing *and have it. I think in a literal sense that if you change something, you have killed its inital form as it no longer exists. sometimes that part to be changed, that aspect, has to be dropped and

substituted with whatever i feel is "healthier", but i’m not sure that it dies so much as is redirected into a different state. the change is like a tree seed taking root, the seed doesn’t die, it just alters it’s life state and becomes what its potential is. i shouldn’t post when i’m tired..

No, I see where you are going, and I think we agree. We’re just using different words, I think. I don’t think it matters whether the intial form dies or simply enters a different ststae. All I mean is that the intial state can no longer exist in its form once you change it. A seed which becomes a flower is no longer a seed. You should post all the time. At least while I’m still here *g* – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – i’ll do more thinking on this and get back to you naomi

Response:

‘Ello ‘ello …

Hey you,

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi you, Give in? Does it really feel like a defeat? I know what you mean (or what I think you mean) – every time I do something I’ve told myself I’m not going to do (for whatever reason) it does, yes, feel like a defeat. But it needn’t be that way, yaknow. The internet, like the telephone, is morally neutral. No no…. I mean settle in here as unhappy and ill as I have been. Deciding whether I would fight to move out of this or settle in and just accept being this unhappy as the norm. I don’t have anything to say to the idea of being miserable as the norm except to nod. Silently. Been there, and you can keep the fershluggina t-shirt.

As long as it fits, anyway *g* Still struggling to keep the weight I lost from creeping back. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A sign from outside yourself, you mean? My "sign" has been to trust my own instincts, more or less. Not from outside, but from inside, because (point coming up –) what you are inside is enough. Enough and more. Just thought I’d mention it. Learning to trust my instincts has been very hard for me. I still battle with it. In fact, I recently trusted someone with an awful lot of info about me, and eveyr fiber of my being was telling me not to. I didn’t listen, because I didn’t want to hurt their feelings. Then, surprise, some of the info I trusted them with ended up becoming part of the public record, so to speak. Live and live and live and live and eventually, oh please god, learn. I hope. I wish I had listened to my instincts, though. I have so much internal chatter that its hard to take any of it seriously. The voices in my head are having a permanent cocktail party. *shrug* Finding the part that is truthful and almost always right (for me, anyway) is not simple. And I don’t know that its a recovery issue, to be honest. I think its a function of maturity and experience. (There have to be *some* perks for growing old(er), don’t there?)

True. Makes me wonder if the part of us that is surprised we aren’t eighteen anymore, which is surprised because we SWEAR it was just last week that our kids were babies, if that part of us isn’t always at war with the part of us that has learned lessons, gotten wrinkled, etc. Maybe that’s part of it. I noticed that on top of my head, most of my roots are silver. It had been a long time since I had seen my roots so I was surprised to find how advanced the change had been. I’ve decided to let it grow out a bit just to see what it looks like, but there is this part of me saying ‘are you INSANE? ROOTS?’ Duh. I said a long time ago that I don’t think we ever get all the answers we expected to find when we grew up. I don’t think we ever grow up, anymore. I think we just keep going. I’m sorry that what happens to you online happens. It mystifies and amazes me, and is off the bizarre-o-meter. You cope with it better than I could.

They’ve given me a bizarre kind of celebrity which will be interesting if I ever manage to publish anything. It’s one of those things where I can turn it on and off, though. If it were happening to me offline, if I were being pursued by a similar group offline in the same way, I would handle it much differently. Online though, I view it when I’m in a place to do that, archive it and then I can turn my back on it and it goes away. As long as that stays the case, I can live with it *shrug* We’ll see how it goes when I open a new site. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Opening a website, coming back. And I’ve missed you, too. I will never, ever get angry with a friend who dropped out of sight without a word, again. I haven’t answered e mail, I haven’t visited most of my favorite reads. I wouldn’t be surprised if most of the people I used to read most often were angry or felt like I deserted them. Then there are the people who really didin’t miss me at all *g* Within minutes of leaving the intial post here, I was getting nastygrams about how worthless my voice really was and why bother coming back, etc One thoughtful person suggested to my husband that next time he just let me wander into traffic. See "bizarre", above. I don’t understand why people go out of their way to be ghastly, but I don’t worry and fret myself into a tizzy trying to get some sense out of it any more. I suppose that’s progress of a sort.

I think so. I think you have to be able to accept that some things just kind of *are before you can stop being bugged by them, right? That’s the way I think it will be with the Random. I’m getting better about it because I am closer to accepting that sometimes shit just happens, and you can’t control everything. I can be a good mother and I can do everything I can think to do to keep my kids safe, but shit can still happen. Every part of my being rails against that and fights it. But I’m getting better. I’m loosening the leash a little. With my middle one, I’m trusting her with more independence, more freedom. The other two, I am encouraging not only more independence but I’m also making them accept more responsibility for things they do. I could go on about that one all day, but I won’t. Bleh. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I guess the idea is to maybe keep me from coming back? Push me over the edge? When I finally got what was going on, I almost laughed out loud, and then I wanted to cry. I *threaten some people. My smarts or my tenacity or my unwillingness to back down, whatever it is, I threaten some people. If those people had any idea at all who I really am, if they had half the knowledge about me they assume to have when they make pronouncements about who I am, I would be the last person on earth to catch their eye and send them into self defense mode. It just amazes me. But it *didn’t crush me. It did not make me fall down dead or want to die. I was a little tired reading it, maybe. I just don’t have the energy to expend on being angry with or hurt by it. That seems to be another line I’ve crossed. Certain things that once would have made me react one way no longer seem to have the power to send *me into attack mode. You get tired, I think. I did, anyway. I was everlastingly tired of being someone that I didn’t particularly like. I don’t like who I am now, don’t misunderstand, but I trust her a bit.

Yes, that was a big part of it, I think. And I don’t know how well I like myself now, but I know what I didn’t like about myself then. And like you, I think I am going to trust myself more and before I like myself. I could tell you all day what *I* like about you, but you wouldn’t really hear it, would you? I wouldn’t. The lady who donated my webspace has so much faith in me and I finally asked her ‘why me? there are so MANY talented people out there, why me?’ and she said ‘you have a unique story to tell’. I could have kissed her for that. That I could trust and understand. If she had said ‘because you’re sweet and deserving and I like you so much’ I would have blown it off. Back when I was thought to have "management potential" I was sent for a public speaking course, during which I was videotaped giving a talk. Of course, I suffered agonies getting ready for that, but when I saw the finished product, I completely amazed myself by sort of liking that person up there talking. Not me, of course – I didn’t perceive that person as me, which is another discussion. But likeable. So I try to be her, you know? That likeable person. It’s more of a struggle than you probably imagine. My default me is sort of … well, not likeable. Not a warrior, like you can be at your best, but thoroughly selfish, as has been pointed out to me.

I’ve never seen that in you, so you must be hiding it well *g* I think it’s a lot easier to imagine it than you think, though. Everytime I leave my house, I put on a persona. I hide behind make up, or hair, or clothes. I listen to a certain kind of music. I hide behind a thousand things. I act, and I do it well. I’m competent and tough with doctors, schools and bureaucrats and when I have to be, I’m a dissolved mess. I use it all unashamedly to do what needs to be done for me and the kids. Who I am…I have no idea anymore. I only know who I am in any given moment and it changes as quickly as the next moment comes. That’s one of my gifts. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Overall, I am hoping I will be able to balance things better this time. I’m just really so tired, though. Most of the time, I’m just kind of weary. It takes a lot of energy to do either, doesn’t it? Put a legitimate piece of myself on the net or engage in a flame war, it all takes energy. *g* Tonight, all the energy I have is going to be taken up in watching white petals turn different colors and learning about how and why flowers suck up water when you put them in a glass, oh joy :) Care for a worm farm? You can send away for 200 earthworms and watch them … um, worm through the earth. Talk about joy. My five-year-old grandson thinks it sounds just dandy. So, bless her forever, does his mom.

Um….no. No thank you. No worms, no ant farms, nothing that crawls, creeps, moves breathes, thanks. And for the record, no playdoh, either. If I hate a parent, I always give her kid some playdoh. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – < … You know I think the best journals are about content, not glitz, CJ notwithstanding. You’ll never out-flash (heh) the flashy. The

Response:

X-No-Archive: yes Nah. It’s just her. She’s a lot like Alan that way. People are who they are and it’s silly to get all fussy about it. I don’t know who *her* is…but, it’s wrong regardless. Cruel behavior doesn’t get excused just because the person it’s coming from has that tendency. It was wrong for some one to suggest that your husband allow you to walk into traffic — I don’t care what the reason.

I’m not saying it’s right or excuseable, Deb. I’m saying I stopoped being surprised by what comes out of her mouth a long time ago, because the same thing *always comes out of her mouth. I know, when I see her name attached to something, exactly what I will find. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – so….there. peace, d Whoever travels without a guide, needs two hundred years for a two-day journey. ~ Rumi~ — For more information about this NNTP posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

Yes. In many cases, with many people, it *is unprovoked. And it’s still *wrong. One person being an asshole doesn’t give license to everyone they encounter to be ans asshole. The initial asshole saying fucked up stuff is responsible for his/her stuff. The person responding (having been "provoked") is responsible for their *own stuff. I guess it’s all a matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar Kc

Response:

Hey!! What was that noise I just heard?! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -One person being an asshole doesn’t give license to everyone they encounter to be ans asshole. The initial asshole saying fucked up stuff is responsible for his/her stuff. The person responding (having been "provoked") is responsible for their *own stuff. I guess it’s all a matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not). There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar Kc

Response:

Dunno. Your perception is your reality, James. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – One person being an asshole doesn’t give license to everyone they encounter to be ans asshole. The initial asshole saying fucked up stuff is responsible for his/her stuff. The person responding (having been "provoked") is responsible for their *own stuff. I guess it’s all a matter of personal choice (as to whether to be a jerk or not). There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g* And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar Kc

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi you, Change sucks, I’m here to tell you. All change, all the time. (Yes, I’m a late adapter, why do you ask?) Even positive change, because who am I to be happy, after all … ? But change is what life *is*. Yeah. I talked to someone in e mail about that, that for part of you to change, another part has to die (the part you are channging has to die in its current form). i just wanted to address this part. do you really think that a part of you has to die for change to occur? i’m not sure that’s always the case. I think that literally, you cannot change a thing *and have it. I think in a literal sense that if you change something, you have killed its inital form as it no longer exists. i think i see what you mean…flour, sugar, eggs, butter, leavening and

vanilla as separate constituents don’t make a cake but if you combine them, add head and time, and they usually make something worth eating…but they’re no longer what they were… Exactly. To become the cake they had to stop being what they were, in and of themselves. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – sometimes that part to be changed, that aspect, has to be dropped and substituted with whatever i feel is "healthier", but i’m not sure that it dies so much as is redirected into a different state. the change is like a tree seed taking root, the seed doesn’t die, it just alters it’s life state and becomes what its potential is. i shouldn’t post when i’m tired.. No, I see where you are going, and I think we agree. We’re just using different words, I think. I don’t think it matters whether the intial form dies or simply enters a different ststae. All I mean is that the intial state can no longer exist in its form once you change it. A seed which becomes a flower is no longer a seed. *nods* i see what you mean now You should post all the time. At least while I’m still here *g* why, danke

You’re uh…you’re whatever the German word for ‘welcome’ is. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Yes, it was all so totally unprovoked. There are some people whose opinion really *doesn’t affect me. I do what I can to protect our family from it, and then I leave it alone. There was a time when I would have gone charging in with an awful lot of heavy punctuation, bad grammar and ALL CAPS. I’ll say this, though: whoever said that if you ignore someone long enough, they will go away and find a new target was wrong *g*

And over time you have certainly proven that. Shar – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Kc

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi you, Change sucks, I’m here to tell you. All change, all the time. (Yes, I’m a late adapter, why do you ask?) Even positive change, because who am I to be happy, after all … ? But change is what life *is*. Yeah. I talked to someone in e mail about that, that for part of you to change, another part has to die (the part you are channging has to die in its current form). i just wanted to address this part. do you really think that a part of you has to die for change to occur? i’m not sure that’s always the case. I think that literally, you cannot change a thing *and have it. I think in a literal sense that if you change something, you have killed its inital form as it no longer exists.

i think i see what you mean…flour, sugar, eggs, butter, leavening and vanilla as separate constituents don’t make a cake but if you combine them, add head and time, and they usually make something worth eating…but they’re no longer what they were… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -sometimes that part to be changed, that aspect, has to be dropped and substituted with whatever i feel is "healthier", but i’m not sure that it dies so much as is redirected into a different state. the change is like a tree seed taking root, the seed doesn’t die, it just alters it’s life state and becomes what its potential is. i shouldn’t post when i’m tired.. No, I see where you are going, and I think we agree. We’re just using different words, I think. I don’t think it matters whether the intial form dies or simply enters a different ststae. All I mean is that the intial state can no longer exist in its form once you change it. A seed which becomes a flower is no longer a seed.

*nods* i see what you mean now You should post all the time. At least while I’m still here *g*

why, danke

Response:

Hi you, Change sucks, I’m here to tell you. All change, all the time. (Yes, I’m a late adapter, why do you ask?) Even positive change, because who am I to be happy, after all … ? But change is what life *is*. Yeah. I talked to someone in e mail about that, that for part of you to change, another part has to die (the part you are channging has to die in its current form).

i just wanted to address this part. do you really think that a part of you has to die for change to occur? i’m not sure that’s always the case. sometimes that part to be changed, that aspect, has to be dropped and substituted with whatever i feel is "healthier", but i’m not sure that it dies so much as is redirected into a different state. the change is like a tree seed taking root, the seed doesn’t die, it just alters it’s life state and becomes what its potential is. i shouldn’t post when i’m tired.. i’ll do more thinking on this and get back to you naomi

Response:

X-No-Archive: yes One thoughtful person suggested to my husband that next time he just let me wander into traffic. that’s just so wrong peace,

that group a *lot of stuff to Liz (and others) that is not only just *wrong, it’s cruel and ignorant. Kc

Response:

X-No-Archive: yes One thoughtful person suggested to my husband that next time he just let me wander into traffic. that’s just so wrong peace,

Nah. It’s just her. She’s a lot like Alan that way. People are who they are and it’s silly to get all fussy about it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – d Whoever travels without a guide, needs two hundred years for a two-day journey. ~ Rumi~ — For more information about this NNTP posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

Hi you,

Hello, you.

I mentioned recently that I was going through a struggle to see whether or not I was going to be able to move past where I was or give in and just kind of settle in here. Give in? Does it really feel like a defeat? I know what you mean (or what I think you mean) – every time I do something I’ve told myself I’m not going to do (for whatever reason) it does, yes, feel like a defeat. But it needn’t be that way, yaknow. The internet, like the telephone, is morally neutral.

No no…. I mean settle in here as unhappy and ill as I have been. Deciding whether I would fight to move out of this or settle in and just accept being this unhappy as the norm. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve spoken to some of you via e mail about having been sick so long, gotten so used to saying what I could not do for so long that I really had no idea at *all anymore what I could or could not do. All my adult life (the part of it after I became aware that it belonged to me, anyway) I have been waiting for some kind of sign. A sign to tell me what to do, when to start, what my gift was, where my niche was so I would know what to do next. A sign from outside yourself, you mean? My "sign" has been to trust my own instincts, more or less. Not from outside, but from inside, because (point coming up –) what you are inside is enough. Enough and more. Just thought I’d mention it.

Learning to trust my instincts has been very hard for me. I still battle with it. In fact, I recently trusted someone with an awful lot of info about me, and eveyr fiber of my being was telling me not to. I didn’t listen, because I didn’t want to hurt their feelings. Then, surprise, some of the info I trusted them with ended up becoming part of the public record, so to speak. Live and live and live and live and eventually, oh please god, learn. I hope. I wish I had listened to my instincts, though. I’m thinking, though, that maybe there is never any one big moment in which it all becomes clear. Along the way there are dozens of little signs, little voices telling you what you need to know. You just have to be able to hear them. I think that is as big a moment of clarity as we get: the moment when we realize there are little voices and we can choose or not to listen to them. I’ve been struggling a lot of late with the idea of coming back to the web. I’m glad you’re coming back. I’ve missed you.

Opening a website, coming back. And I’ve missed you, too. I will never, ever get angry with a friend who dropped out of sight without a word, again. I haven’t answered e mail, I haven’t visited most of my favorite reads. I wouldn’t be surprised if most of the people I used to read most often were angry or felt like I deserted them. Then there are the people who really didin’t miss me at all *g* Within minutes of leaving the intial post here, I was getting nastygrams about how worthless my voice really was and why bother coming back, etc One thoughtful person suggested to my husband that next time he just let me wander into traffic. I guess the idea is to maybe keep me from coming back? Push me over the edge? When I finally got what was going on, I almost laughed out loud, and then I wanted to cry. I *threaten some people. My smarts or my tenacity or my unwillingness to back down, whatever it is, I threaten some people. If those people had any idea at all who I really am, if they had half the knowledge about me they assume to have when they make pronouncements about who I am, I would be the last person on earth to catch their eye and send them into self defense mode. It just amazes me. But it *didn’t crush me. It did not make me fall down dead or want to die. I was a little tired reading it, maybe. I just don’t have the energy to expend on being angry with or hurt by it. That seems to be another line I’ve crossed. Certain things that once would have made me react one way no longer seem to have the power to send *me into attack mode. Overall, I am hoping I will be able to balance things better this time. I’m just really so tired, though. Most of the time, I’m just kind of weary. It takes a lot of energy to do either, doesn’t it? Put a legitimate piece of myself on the net or engage in a flame war, it all takes energy. *g* Tonight, all the energy I have is going to be taken up in watching white petals turn different colors and learning about how and why flowers suck up water when you put them in a glass, oh joy :) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – More than all that, though, I have been focused on making sure I presented the prettiest, savviest, most up to date flashiest site I can. I can spend an entire day, months even, on designing the packaging (and have, for that matter). At first because I was enthralled by a love for designing and learning to code and later because I did not want to leave myself open to criticism. I did not want to hear that my design sucked. Tonight, as I was thinking how funny it is that the worse you look, the more invisible you are, it came to me that the design of my site isn’t a real expression of who I am, any more than the clothes I wear are. That’s just about what I want you (the generic you) to *think I am. You know I think the best journals are about content, not glitz, CJ notwithstanding. You’ll never out-flash (heh) the flashy. The minute you master HTML, there’s CSS. Then ASP. Then the newer new thing. Some of the best journals I know are very, very basic in their design. Minimalist. I don’t go there to be awed by how well they use Photoshop, I go there for the writing. Books have very few animated .gifs and they do surprisingly well.

Heh *g* True. But don’t you think people on the internet, people who choose to spend their time on the net rather than reading a book do so, in part, because of the instant eye candy kind of glitz? I don’t know why I walked away any more than I know why I came back, though I could point to factors. Nothing happened. Nothing changed. I do not know why I asked a store manager for a job application this afternoon instead of burning myself again and I do not know why tonight the idea of burning myself seems so attractive or why this letter has been so hard to write. *nodding* You have choices, though. Burning (or cutting, or other -ing things) is a choice. A crap choice, as someone once told me, but a choice.

I used to think so, too. I don’t think it’s a crap choice, anymore. I’ve learned that it is a far better choice to burn myself than take a bottle of pills. Whatever works, as far as I am concerned. I don’t have the resources, financial or internal right now, to have a therapist at my beck and call for my the mini meltdowns I keep having like strokes. I thought long and hard about what alternatives I had, and I remembered how good I felt, how much pressure was relieved when I burned myself. It had to be something like that, but it had to be something that the kids wouldn’t pick up on. It had to be something they never see. I burn myself in a place they can’t see. They aren’t around me when I do it and I have done it enough times now that I don’t even make a noise anymore. I bet it’s the way diabetics get used to shots all the time. Drinking with Xanax didn’t address any of that. Enough Xanax to work left me too wiped to be available or drive safely. But I needed *something and it had to hurt and it had to leave a scar, something I can use to pull it out of me and then see. This works for me. And I’m not thinking about driving off roads or finding myself in dazes where I can’t turn right or left because I can’t think well enough to choose. It helps. But oh, Liz, good on you for that application. Give yourself a huge pat on the back. You rock the house, girl. You know you do.

Yeah, but I am only available for morning hours, and they wanted someone available all the time. But I did fill it out and all. Change sucks, I’m here to tell you. All change, all the time. (Yes, I’m a late adapter, why do you ask?) Even positive change, because who am I to be happy, after all … ? But change is what life *is*.

Yeah. I talked to someone in e mail about that, that for part of you to change, another part has to die (the part you are channging has to die in its current form). I am opening a new site, and the design is really going to bite weenies. I can tell you that *g* And this will be its first entry, I think. Good deal. I’m glad.

You? How are you? You owe me e mail. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Catherine

Response:

welcome back naomi – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I mentioned recently that I was going through a struggle to see whether or not I was going to be able to move past where I was or give in and just kind of settle in here. I’ve spoken to some of you via e mail about having been sick so long, gotten so used to saying what I could not do for so long that I really had no idea at *all anymore what I could or could not do. All my adult life (the part of it after I became aware that it belonged to me, anyway) I have been waiting for some kind of sign. A sign to tell me what to do, when to start, what my gift was, where my niche was so I would know what to do next. I’m thinking, though, that maybe there is never any one big moment in which it all becomes clear. Along the way there are dozens of little signs, little voices telling you what you need to know. You just have to be able to hear them. I think that is as big a moment of clarity as we get: the moment when we realize there are little voices and we can choose or not to listen to them. I’ve been struggling a lot of late with the idea of coming back to the web. I have had generously donated to me all the space for my site I could ever have asked for. This was donated to me a couple of months back, and since then I have often visited the engine of the space. It was comforting to know that I had a place there and I was immensely grateful that the site owner did not press me to be creative before I was ready. I have been daunted by the idea of transferring all the archives to a new space and all the re-coding that will involve as well as buckling to the intricacies of Graymatter, a system which allows you to design your entire site in FrontPage (or any other html editor) as long as you remember to use certain proprietary tags. Kind of apt, that, don’t you think? The idea that I should be able to design my site the way I want as long as I can follow some basic rules. Rules which are constant, unchanging and which, if you follow them, always deliver exactly what is promised. Soothing to a woman who was knocked off her feet by The Random. More than all that, though, I have been focused on making sure I presented the prettiest, savviest, most up to date flashiest site I can. I can spend an entire day, months even, on designing the packaging (and have, for that matter). At first because I was enthralled by a love for designing and learning to code and later because I did not want to leave myself open to criticism. I did not want to hear that my design sucked. Tonight, as I was thinking how funny it is that the worse you look, the more invisible you are, it came to me that the design of my site isn’t a real expression of who I am, any more than the clothes I wear are. That’s just about what I want you (the generic you) to *think I am. Over the years I had a web site, I’ve gotten letters from people thanking me for the help I provided, the direction I gave them, the hope or sense of commonality they felt when they read my words. I’ve had people thank me for being brave, being honest, being willing to share. I’ve even had people thank me for helping to save their lives. Not one of those letters ever began or ended with ‘btw, thanks for the great site design’. Someone said to me recently that being part of a site I had left had been like going to a symphony and not hearing the violins. I get e mail from people all the time asking when I am coming back because they miss reading me. These incredible, generous compliments have nothing to do with the way I look or the colors I choose for page design or makeup. They’re about my *voice. It’s about what I have to say. I don’t understand how, I don’t get the mechanism of how what I say translates to how it makes people feel, but I can hear the voice now that tells me that my voice matters. Some people make the world a better place through activism. Some by building towering monuments to the human spirit, some by saving lives, some by adopting stray pets. I will never get an award for best site design and I will never be part of any of the prestigious rings devoted to artistic expression. Because of my difficulties in social settings, I’m never going to do any of that *g* The only thing I have to offer is my voice and my view of the world: my past, my present, what there may be in the future. How I was shaped, what made me who I am, how I use it all to go on. The only thing I have that will ever have any worth or make any difference in anyone’s life (besides my children, who I will one day offer to the world with the hope they be treated well and fairly) is my voice. And the letters I have received from people thanking me for my help are all little signs. They were the voices I had been waiting for and ignored. I didn’t have any one moment in which I realized that. I didn’t lay in bed and get zapped with an epiphany-gram. I said a million years ago (and a million times since then) that the only thing which ever made it possible to live with my past was knowing I could use it to help someone else. In the time since I shut my site down, I have lost that, and the impact on my life has been immeasurable. There have been moments where it was very touch and go, to be honest. Nights where I took way too many pills, burned too long or too large, moments where my husband had to drag me back out of the street I had wandered into. I walked away from the only support system I have ever known and willingly gave up the only voice I had ever been allowed to have. I walked away from all the people who had helped me through so many moments and were so willing, if I would only let them, to help me through the next one. I walked away from being heard into a deafening silence that almost killed me. I don’t know why I walked away any more than I know why I came back, though I could point to factors. Nothing happened. Nothing changed. I do not know why I asked a store manager for a job application this afternoon instead of burning myself again and I do not know why tonight the idea of burning myself seems so attractive or why this letter has been so hard to write. No epiphanies, no burning bush. Just little signs I am learning to read, little voices I am learning to listen to. I do not promise not to kill myself (a loud voice, that one) and I won’t tell you what I cannot do because I don’t know anymore. I am opening a new site, and the design is really going to bite weenies. I can tell you that *g* And this will be its first entry, I think.

Response:

A sign to tell me what to do, when to start, what my gift was, where my niche was so I would know what to do next.

Just get your recovery Liz – detox the brain of the bitter salty tears and use your emotions to take you along the path to your recovery. once those tears are out – the path is manifest. your genius, your gifts, your talents come out – God, the system of things makes it that way I am convinced – in seeing how perpatrators are so fucking dumb. Bush is dumb – oui ? I tell you – its true – the United Nations are to stoopid to find the doomsday weapons. see Liz — I have an attachment disorder, bonding problems, working on them – some antidependency – cancer – and then I got some near death expereiences to give me a little more distance between me and the world … something to keep me busy – sink my teeth in and fix up. I got a big brain – so I got big problems to fix and play around with. it sure as hell is not boring – now is it … sumbuddie luvs ya liz – sumbuddie luvs ya a lot

Response:

Hello, you. I mentioned recently that I was going through a struggle to see whether or not I was going to be able to move past where I was or give in and just kind of settle in here.

Give in? Does it really feel like a defeat? I know what you mean (or what I think you mean) – every time I do something I’ve told myself I’m not going to do (for whatever reason) it does, yes, feel like a defeat. But it needn’t be that way, yaknow. The internet, like the telephone, is morally neutral. I’ve spoken to some of you via e mail about having been sick so long, gotten so used to saying what I could not do for so long that I really had no idea at *all anymore what I could or could not do. All my adult life (the part of it after I became aware that it belonged to me, anyway) I have been waiting for some kind of sign. A sign to tell me what to do, when to start, what my gift was, where my niche was so I would know what to do next.

A sign from outside yourself, you mean? My "sign" has been to trust my own instincts, more or less. Not from outside, but from inside, because (point coming up –) what you are inside is enough. Enough and more. Just thought I’d mention it. I’m thinking, though, that maybe there is never any one big moment in which it all becomes clear. Along the way there are dozens of little signs, little voices telling you what you need to know. You just have to be able to hear them. I think that is as big a moment of clarity as we get: the moment when we realize there are little voices and we can choose or not to listen to them. I’ve been struggling a lot of late with the idea of coming back to the web.

I’m glad you’re coming back. I’ve missed you. < … More than all that, though, I have been focused on making sure I presented the prettiest, savviest, most up to date flashiest site I can. I can spend an entire day, months even, on designing the packaging (and have, for that matter). At first because I was enthralled by a love for designing and learning to code and later because I did not want to leave myself open to criticism. I did not want to hear that my design sucked. Tonight, as I was thinking how funny it is that the worse you look, the more invisible you are, it came to me that the design of my site isn’t a real expression of who I am, any more than the clothes I wear are. That’s just about what I want you (the generic you) to *think I am.

You know I think the best journals are about content, not glitz, CJ notwithstanding. You’ll never out-flash (heh) the flashy. The minute you master HTML, there’s CSS. Then ASP. Then the newer new thing. Some of the best journals I know are very, very basic in their design. Minimalist. I don’t go there to be awed by how well they use Photoshop, I go there for the writing. Books have very few animated .gifs and they do surprisingly well. < … I don’t know why I walked away any more than I know why I came back, though I could point to factors. Nothing happened. Nothing changed. I do not know why I asked a store manager for a job application this afternoon instead of burning myself again and I do not know why tonight the idea of burning myself seems so attractive or why this letter has been so hard to write.

*nodding* You have choices, though. Burning (or cutting, or other -ing things) is a choice. A crap choice, as someone once told me, but a choice. But oh, Liz, good on you for that application. Give yourself a huge pat on the back. You rock the house, girl. You know you do. Change sucks, I’m here to tell you. All change, all the time. (Yes, I’m a late adapter, why do you ask?) Even positive change, because who am I to be happy, after all … ? But change is what life *is*. I am opening a new site, and the design is really going to bite weenies. I can tell you that *g* And this will be its first entry, I think.

Good deal. I’m glad. Catherine

Response:

I mentioned recently that I was going through a struggle to see whether or not I was going to be able to move past where I was or give in and just kind of settle in here. I’ve spoken to some of you via e mail about having been sick so long, gotten so used to saying what I could not do for so long that I really had no idea at *all anymore what I could or could not do. All my adult life (the part of it after I became aware that it belonged to me, anyway) I have been waiting for some kind of sign. A sign to tell me what to do, when to start, what my gift was, where my niche was so I would know what to do next. I’m thinking, though, that maybe there is never any one big moment in which it all becomes clear. Along the way there are dozens of little signs, little voices telling you what you need to know. You just have to be able to hear them. I think that is as big a moment of clarity as we get: the moment when we realize there are little voices and we can choose or not to listen to them. I’ve been struggling a lot of late with the idea of coming back to the web. I have had generously donated to me all the space for my site I could ever have asked for. This was donated to me a couple of months back, and since then I have often visited the engine of the space. It was comforting to know that I had a place there and I was immensely grateful that the site owner did not press me to be creative before I was ready. I have been daunted by the idea of transferring all the archives to a new space and all the re-coding that will involve as well as buckling to the intricacies of Graymatter, a system which allows you to design your entire site in FrontPage (or any other html editor) as long as you remember to use certain proprietary tags. Kind of apt, that, don’t you think? The idea that I should be able to design my site the way I want as long as I can follow some basic rules. Rules which are constant, unchanging and which, if you follow them, always deliver exactly what is promised. Soothing to a woman who was knocked off her feet by The Random. More than all that, though, I have been focused on making sure I presented the prettiest, savviest, most up to date flashiest site I can. I can spend an entire day, months even, on designing the packaging (and have, for that matter). At first because I was enthralled by a love for designing and learning to code and later because I did not want to leave myself open to criticism. I did not want to hear that my design sucked. Tonight, as I was thinking how funny it is that the worse you look, the more invisible you are, it came to me that the design of my site isn’t a real expression of who I am, any more than the clothes I wear are. That’s just about what I want you (the generic you) to *think I am. Over the years I had a web site, I’ve gotten letters from people thanking me for the help I provided, the direction I gave them, the hope or sense of commonality they felt when they read my words. I’ve had people thank me for being brave, being honest, being willing to share. I’ve even had people thank me for helping to save their lives. Not one of those letters ever began or ended with ‘btw, thanks for the great site design’. Someone said to me recently that being part of a site I had left had been like going to a symphony and not hearing the violins. I get e mail from people all the time asking when I am coming back because they miss reading me. These incredible, generous compliments have nothing to do with the way I look or the colors I choose for page design or makeup. They’re about my *voice. It’s about what I have to say. I don’t understand how, I don’t get the mechanism of how what I say translates to how it makes people feel, but I can hear the voice now that tells me that my voice matters. Some people make the world a better place through activism. Some by building towering monuments to the human spirit, some by saving lives, some by adopting stray pets. I will never get an award for best site design and I will never be part of any of the prestigious rings devoted to artistic expression. Because of my difficulties in social settings, I’m never going to do any of that *g* The only thing I have to offer is my voice and my view of the world: my past, my present, what there may be in the future. How I was shaped, what made me who I am, how I use it all to go on. The only thing I have that will ever have any worth or make any difference in anyone’s life (besides my children, who I will one day offer to the world with the hope they be treated well and fairly) is my voice. And the letters I have received from people thanking me for my help are all little signs. They were the voices I had been waiting for and ignored. I didn’t have any one moment in which I realized that. I didn’t lay in bed and get zapped with an epiphany-gram. I said a million years ago (and a million times since then) that the only thing which ever made it possible to live with my past was knowing I could use it to help someone else. In the time since I shut my site down, I have lost that, and the impact on my life has been immeasurable. There have been moments where it was very touch and go, to be honest. Nights where I took way too many pills, burned too long or too large, moments where my husband had to drag me back out of the street I had wandered into. I walked away from the only support system I have ever known and willingly gave up the only voice I had ever been allowed to have. I walked away from all the people who had helped me through so many moments and were so willing, if I would only let them, to help me through the next one. I walked away from being heard into a deafening silence that almost killed me. I don’t know why I walked away any more than I know why I came back, though I could point to factors. Nothing happened. Nothing changed. I do not know why I asked a store manager for a job application this afternoon instead of burning myself again and I do not know why tonight the idea of burning myself seems so attractive or why this letter has been so hard to write. No epiphanies, no burning bush. Just little signs I am learning to read, little voices I am learning to listen to. I do not promise not to kill myself (a loud voice, that one) and I won’t tell you what I cannot do because I don’t know anymore. I am opening a new site, and the design is really going to bite weenies. I can tell you that *g* And this will be its first entry, I think.

Response:

Let's hear it for our children

admin — Mon, 19 May 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Why do you think that is "normal?" Normal for our family is different than normal for any other family I know. Kitten True evangelical faith cannot lie dormant. It clothes the naked, feeds the hungry, comforts the sorrowful, shelters the destitute. And serves those who harm it. – Menno Simons, 1539 Courage, Real courage, is no quick fix. It doesn’t come in a bottle or a pill, It comes from discipline. From taking everything life hands you and being your best either because of it or in spite of it. — Ty Murray

Response:

who have to put up with so much misunderstanding from their teachers and who have to struggle everyday just to cope with their schoolwork. My son has some wonderful traits but all his teachers see are the negative sides!

I told my son that should his teacher ever decide that it is her who is in need of some drugs that he should send her my way and I would let her know what I think might do the trick. He laughed. Jack Poetry may make us from time to time a little more aware of the deeper, unnamed feelings which form the substratum of our being, to which we rarely penetrate; for our lives are mostly a constant evasion of ourselves. T. S. Eliot

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – bcpl.net…. Baltimore Co. public library? I use those terminals when I’m working in D.C…small world. In the 16 years I’ve had kids in school, they’ve never been in an classroom where they were expected to "sit at a desk for 7 hours." Relating my own expirence… Not only did I not say that "this is how everybody else is" but I made it clear that YMMV. = As for "sit at a desk for 40 years"…. My ADHD son? LOL! I don’t think it’s gonna happen. I’m the same way, but you’ll want to be prepared for a continuance of the abnormal. Having ADD means that for the most part you don’t fit in. Everybody I went to school with has a steady career, insurance, 2.5 kids, minivans and 401k’s.

I went to my (mumble mumble)th HS reunion a couple of weeks ago. It’s a very small private school in New England. The handful of classmates who attended were pretty well established in careers: CEOs, CFOs, one tenured college prof, a commercial real estate broker in Boston–and me. I was the only Hawaiian shirt, the most hair and the only piercing. I have a resume that runs pages and pages. They all looked at me enviously. Personally, I don’t know all that many people who are still on the same career path they started. I graduated HS early and took off to Coasta Rica for 2 years to surf. When I came back I joined the USMC and made our top-tier SOF squad in my third year. I ride a motercycle without a helmet, I surf hurricane swells and I have no time to settle down for chit’lins.

It’s the typical ADD high-stim life. Many of us here can match you thrill-for-thrill. :) I wish I could take a magic pill that would make me *want* a ‘normal’ cookie-cutter life. I wish I could be happy as a worker-bee, I’m sure I would be much safer and happier.

From the little I know of you from your posts so far, I think you’d be miserable in that kind of life–"magic pill" or not. We make our own safety and our own happiness. Ask any male that’s thought about it….being a man in America these days means that you get out of HS or college then you chain yourself to a desk for 4 decades until their force you to retire so they don’t have to pay full pension.

No one that I know has that kind of grim picture. Joe Parsons

Response:

As much as I say I want a nice, calm, peaceful life, look at what I did over the weekend. I love doing the rodeo/horseshow stuff. Only problem is that with the health problems I’ve had the last few months, I’m totally worn out today. It’s not that I really overdid it this weekend, but getting out for 3 days in 100+*F temps sapped every bit of my strength. Kitten True evangelical faith cannot lie dormant. It clothes the naked, feeds the hungry, comforts the sorrowful, shelters the destitute. And serves those who harm it. – Menno Simons, 1539 Courage, Real courage, is no quick fix. It doesn’t come in a bottle or a pill, It comes from discipline. From taking everything life hands you and being your best either because of it or in spite of it. — Ty Murray

Response:

I’m sorry, I must rant. I cringe when people fill their head with this crap. It is a genetic mutation to make people impulsive and breed abundantly. Seeing as this is such a wonderful gift, a true sign of a "great mind", why is it so many adopted children tend to have it? This obviously coming from my depressed-agnostic view of the world, but I cannot help but feel angry when one sees that both sides of my family suffer from this. Obviously, I cannot blame it for everything that has happened to me, but when one finds a common profile and books full of similar stories, one cannot help but get very angry. Too bad I’m not a stupid catholic and just thinks "God made me this way for a reason" as I pump out my 3rd child in a row with down-syndrome. Again, I’m sorry, I got thrown out of Catholic school. So did two of my uncles. Btw, one of them killed him-self. "It is the restless kid who ends up in jail. It is the restless kid who turns to drugs. It is the restless kid who is the social misfit. It is the restless kid that brings a gun to school. It is the restless kid who never graduates." It is also more than just restlessness and not being able to sit still. It is about being able to get through the boring sections of a book, or perhaps being able to get through boring class materials. Perhaps then once one gets through the boring material, one could develop a love of science, math, reading, philosophy, but we tend to prefer things that produce immediate stimulus such as drugs, gambling, sex, and other high-risk activities. -Jeff P.S. Do some research on many of those inventors. Just in my 10 minute research, it seems many of them had "undistinguised" academic careers, in a time when next to noone got an appreciable amount of schooling. The true ADDers were probably at the brothels. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – who have to put up with so much misunderstanding from their teachers and who have to struggle everyday just to cope with their schoolwork. My son has some wonderful traits but all his teachers see are the negative sides! Yup, 10,000 yrs ago, it was the restless kid who invented the wheel, 4,000 years ago it was the restless kid who came up w/ the concept of monotheism, since…it was the restless kid who came up with the telescope, the theory of gravity, the concept of germs, the polio vaccine, the internal combustion engine, the Cistine chapel, the Oracle at Delphi, the journey across the Atlantic, the covered-wagons across the American West. It’s the restless kid that runs into burning buildings with a firehose, jumps out of airplanes over Afghanistan with a rifle, and drives the economy on the NYSE floor. Early last century, a man who couldn’t keep the ‘racing thoughts’ out of his head wroted down E=mc^2–touching off perhaps 500 years of new possibilities in physics. Today, it’s the restless kids who are drugged so that they can do the unnatural: sit at a desk for 7 hrs in the prime of their childhood, training to sit in a desk for 40 years until retirement. Sorry Mrs. Wendy…was I ranting again? =] PS: I don’t have any kids, but I am, myself ADD…and while I’ve done none of these things (except for jumping out of a plane over Afghanistan…and struggling to sit in a desk for 7 hrs at the age of 10), I’ve discovered since I’ve started studying history that everyone who was anyone in history (with very few exceptions) exibited traits that would have them on medication today. -TacoKeeses

Response:

Wasn’t the ‘unified theory’ bunk, admitted by Einstein? Wasn’t that the theory that held the ‘cosmic constant’ that is basically pulled out of thin air to explain things for which we have explainations for now (not very good ones though)? Yes, you are ranting.

But I had a smilie….I was unaware there were those here that would take such offense to obvious truths. Maybe you guys should put an ‘asshole’ clause in the faq? I don’t recall, are you on meds? Because it has been my experience that the meds do not make me less creative, they make it possible for me to actually do something with the ideas that I have.

ooooo, it’s the defensive thing. Nevermind on the other stuff….I get it. You needn’t take it personally when someone isn’t enamoured w/ meds. -TacoKeeses

Response:

I’m still trying to figure this one out myself. Even for a non-ADDer it has to be about as entertaining as watching paint dry. Unless those damn soccer games are really that amusing. My father’s life consists of work-sleep and after 30 iterations pay-bills. He’s about as happy as nothing. I try to atleast understand how sane and rational people think, and this one is still beyond me. I look at it as "boat versus changing diapers", and I seriously could not wish to pass my cloudy brain on anyone, even my worst enemy. A few of my older (and surprisingly still single) friends say its to shutup the wife. -Jeff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – bcpl.net…. Baltimore Co. public library? I use those terminals when I’m working in D.C…small world. In the 16 years I’ve had kids in school, they’ve never been in an classroom where they were expected to "sit at a desk for 7 hours." Relating my own expirence… Not only did I not say that "this is how everybody else is" but I made it clear that YMMV. = As for "sit at a desk for 40 years"…. My ADHD son? LOL! I don’t think it’s gonna happen. I’m the same way, but you’ll want to be prepared for a continuance of the abnormal. Having ADD means that for the most part you don’t fit in. Everybody I went to school with has a steady career, insurance, 2.5 kids, minivans and 401k’s. I graduated HS early and took off to Coasta Rica for 2 years to surf. When I came back I joined the USMC and made our top-tier SOF squad in my third year. I ride a motercycle without a helmet, I surf hurricane swells and I have no time to settle down for chit’lins. I wish I could take a magic pill that would make me *want* a ‘normal’ cookie-cutter life. I wish I could be happy as a worker-bee, I’m sure I would be much safer and happier. Ask any male that’s thought about it….being a man in America these days means that you get out of HS or college then you chain yourself to a desk for 4 decades until their force you to retire so they don’t have to pay full pension. Of course you have insurance, benefits, free drugs etc… but hell, you need them at that point. -TacoKeeses

Response:

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, but I’m pretty sure you ‘missed it’. -TacoKeeses It’s just Joe splitting hairs for the sake of egocentricity, fun and profit again. Happens to all dissenters in this forum sooner or later. You need to learn not to take him seriously.

=] ’salright…..I don’t take anyone here (especially myself) seriously….afterall we’re all either ‘crazy’, or have ‘crazy’ offspring. -TacoKeeses

Response:

Today, it’s the restless kids who are drugged so that they can do the unnatural: sit at a desk for 7 hrs in the prime of their childhood, training to sit in a desk for 40 years until retirement. Could you help me understand what it is that I missed? I am not aware of any schools (although I’m sure they exist, somewhere) where kids "sit at a desk for 7hrs."

LOL, what do you think ‘class’ is? Maybe pub school is all recess these days, maybe I missed something? The fact that there is this government-mandated educational system is a little creepy when you think about it in a historical context. Our psychology is that of a ‘pack’, much like say a wolves, or gorillas. The pub education system that I went through is more of a ‘herd’ mentality like, say, cattle. The one-size-fits-all approach to education (still) tells little boys that are basically normal that they need to be medicated and it’s a bit scarey. And many ADDers–treated or not–gravitate to vocations where they specifically do NOT "sit at a desk:" sales, the arts, entertainment, law enforcement–even some aspects of the military, for

starters. Right, but in my expirence w/ public schooling….you have no choice what to gravitate to. Again, maybe it’s different now but I doubt it. I maintain that it’s unnatural to take a little boy and stuff him in a room for unending hours on a beautiful day when he should be out playing ‘Tom Sawyer’. Still, it’s much easier to dope them up and make a ’square peg fit a round hole’ in our society. I’m not blanketly condemning anything or anyone. I’m on add meds, and I’m no social revolutionary (hell, I’m a conservative Republican!) It’s all about feeding the need for stimulation. In many public schools, the kid may need parental activism to get the education s/he’s entitled to. Sometimes that’s a tall order–but it *is* deliverable.

Ya, I imagine so. There was no such animal as ‘add’ when I was a young’un. I was just ‘lazy’ and sometimes ’stupid’. I was also told there was something wrong with me when in 6th grade history, I read an account of a slave recounting how his family was divided and sold in S.C. and wept. /scratches chin -TacoKeeses

Response:

That’s a wonderful young man you have there. Teach him not to allow them destroy that. His reacting in ways that are not him is allowing them to change who he is. Kitten True evangelical faith cannot lie dormant. It clothes the naked, feeds the hungry, comforts the sorrowful, shelters the destitute. And serves those who harm it. – Menno Simons, 1539 Courage, Real courage, is no quick fix. It doesn’t come in a bottle or a pill, It comes from discipline. From taking everything life hands you and being your best either because of it or in spite of it. — Ty Murray

Response:

PS: I don’t have any kids, but I am, myself ADD… With respect, this explains a great deal.

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, but I’m pretty sure you ‘missed it’. -TacoKeeses

Response:

bcpl.net…. Baltimore Co. public library? I use those terminals when I’m working in D.C…small world. In the 16 years I’ve had kids in school, they’ve never been in an classroom where they were expected to "sit at a desk for 7 hours."

Relating my own expirence… Not only did I not say that "this is how everybody else is" but I made it clear that YMMV. = As for "sit at a desk for 40 years"…. My ADHD son? LOL! I don’t think it’s gonna happen.

I’m the same way, but you’ll want to be prepared for a continuance of the abnormal. Having ADD means that for the most part you don’t fit in. Everybody I went to school with has a steady career, insurance, 2.5 kids, minivans and 401k’s. I graduated HS early and took off to Coasta Rica for 2 years to surf. When I came back I joined the USMC and made our top-tier SOF squad in my third year. I ride a motercycle without a helmet, I surf hurricane swells and I have no time to settle down for chit’lins. I wish I could take a magic pill that would make me *want* a ‘normal’ cookie-cutter life. I wish I could be happy as a worker-bee, I’m sure I would be much safer and happier. Ask any male that’s thought about it….being a man in America these days means that you get out of HS or college then you chain yourself to a desk for 4 decades until their force you to retire so they don’t have to pay full pension. Of course you have insurance, benefits, free drugs etc… but hell, you need them at that point. -TacoKeeses

Response:

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, but I’m pretty sure you ‘missed it’. -TacoKeeses

It’s just Joe splitting hairs for the sake of egocentricity, fun and profit again. Happens to all dissenters in this forum sooner or later. You need to learn not to take him seriously.

Response:

PS: I don’t have any kids, but I am, myself ADD… With respect, this explains a great deal. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, but I’m pretty sure you ‘missed it’.

Today, it’s the restless kids who are drugged so that they can do the unnatural: sit at a desk for 7 hrs in the prime of their childhood, training to sit in a desk for 40 years until retirement.

Could you help me understand what it is that I missed? I am not aware of any schools (although I’m sure they exist, somewhere) where kids "sit at a desk for 7hrs." And many ADDers–treated or not–gravitate to vocations where they specifically do NOT "sit at a desk:" sales, the arts, entertainment, law enforcement–even some aspects of the military, for starters. It’s all about feeding the need for stimulation. In many public schools, the kid may need parental activism to get the education s/he’s entitled to. Sometimes that’s a tall order–but it *is* deliverable. Joe Parsons

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – who have to put up with so much misunderstanding from their teachers and who have to struggle everyday just to cope with their schoolwork. My son has some wonderful traits but all his teachers see are the negative sides! Yup, 10,000 yrs ago, it was the restless kid who invented the wheel, 4,000 years ago it was the restless kid who came up w/ the concept of monotheism, since…it was the restless kid who came up with the telescope, the theory of gravity, the concept of germs, the polio vaccine, the internal combustion engine, the Cistine chapel, the Oracle at Delphi, the journey across the Atlantic, the covered-wagons across the American West. It’s the restless kid that runs into burning buildings with a firehose, jumps out of airplanes over Afghanistan with a rifle, and drives the economy on the NYSE floor. Early last century, a man who couldn’t keep the ‘racing thoughts’ out of his head wroted down E=mc^2–touching off perhaps 500 years of new possibilities in physics.

However Einstein did not manage to finish the theory of the unified field, which has since been one of the Holy Grails of physics. Maybe if he had been on meds he would have been able to focus well enough to finish it. Today, it’s the restless kids who are drugged so that they can do the unnatural: sit at a desk for 7 hrs in the prime of their childhood, training to sit in a desk for 40 years until retirement. Sorry Mrs. Wendy…was I ranting again? =]

Yes, you are ranting. PS: I don’t have any kids, but I am, myself ADD…and while I’ve done none of these things (except for jumping out of a plane over Afghanistan…and struggling to sit in a desk for 7 hrs at the age of 10), I’ve discovered since I’ve started studying history that everyone who was anyone in history (with very few exceptions) exibited traits that would have them on medication today.

I don’t recall, are you on meds? Because it has been my experience that the meds do not make me less creative, they make it possible for me to actually do something with the ideas that I have. — –John Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – who have to put up with so much misunderstanding from their teachers and who have to struggle everyday just to cope with their schoolwork. My son has some wonderful traits but all his teachers see are the negative sides! My OS and I have had plenty of experience with the struggle to cope and the misunderstandings from teachers about how ADHD impacted his sometimes extraordinary abilities and talents. OTOH, I suppose we were very fortunate in that his teachers were generally able to see those abilities and talents. Of course, sometimes that was part of the problem. The teachers sometimes didn’t understand how someone with his abilities and talents, even with all his struggles, couldn’t do what his less able and talented peers could do so easily.

You bring something up that occurs to me- just because my son has an IQ of 140 he is expected to perform at that level- anything less and he is not trying hard enough. How is this impacting him–and you?

He gets very angry with his teachers to the point of rudeness at times- he tells me they just do not listen to him when he says he can’t do it- he is obviously very frustrated now.I am now in the position because of my continual complaining about how they view him that I have been banned from talking to school and must put every little comment in writing! Why don’t you tell us about your son’s wonderful traits?

He is wonderfully creative, he is very loving and considerate. He helps around the house without complaint(something his elder brother can’t manage). He cares about people, especially when we go to London and see them sleeping in the doorways.Last time he saw an elderly man and gave him his pizza and a cup of tea. He gives half of his pocket money to the hungry children in Africa. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Maybe someone here can help you figure out some way to open the eyes of his teachers or lessening the impact of their negativeness on him and you. And even if they can’t, you may feel better sharing the wonderfulness of your son. Nancy Unique, like everyone else

Response:

Hear! Hear! This is one of the reasons we decided to switch from public education to home education. Kitten True evangelical faith cannot lie dormant. It clothes the naked, feeds the hungry, comforts the sorrowful, shelters the destitute. And serves those who harm it. – Menno Simons, 1539 Courage, Real courage, is no quick fix. It doesn’t come in a bottle or a pill, It comes from discipline. From taking everything life hands you and being your best either because of it or in spite of it. — Ty Murray

Response:

Today, it’s the restless kids who are drugged so that they can do the unnatural: sit at a desk for 7 hrs in the prime of their childhood, training to sit in a desk for 40 years until retirement.

In the 16 years I’ve had kids in school, they’ve never been in an classroom where they were expected to "sit at a desk for 7 hours." At least in their schools, not only is there lots of movement between classes, even in elementary school, but there’s quite a bit of moving around and interactive group work within the classroom. It’s sitting for *7 minutes* at a time that was the problem for my ADHDer. (He didn’t move around the classroom or anything like that, but he was always very fidgety, squirmy.) As for "sit at a desk for 40 years"…. My ADHD son? LOL! I don’t think it’s gonna happen. Nancy Unique, like everyone else

Response:

I have the combined version, but I did well in public school. Of course, I was in a small, rural school. My family has lived in that area for several generations, so everyone knew us. If I ever did anything noteworthy, good or bad, my family knew about it before I got home. The hyperactive portions of my AD/HD showed in things like fidgeting and chewing my fingernails. They inattentive portions showed in my inability to stay focused on what was going on in class, except when it came to basketball, disections, etc. The thing is, I was *allowed* to split my focus as needed, so long as I didn’t cause trouble and kept my grades up. I was even allowed to sleep in class, so long as I kept up my grades. What my children experienced in public school was vastly different from what I experienced as a student. Because we believe in providing children with the learning environment each one needs, we removed them from the environment that was harmful. Kitten True evangelical faith cannot lie dormant. It clothes the naked, feeds the hungry, comforts the sorrowful, shelters the destitute. And serves those who harm it. – Menno Simons, 1539 Courage, Real courage, is no quick fix. It doesn’t come in a bottle or a pill, It comes from discipline. From taking everything life hands you and being your best either because of it or in spite of it. — Ty Murray

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – who have to put up with so much misunderstanding from their teachers and who have to struggle everyday just to cope with their schoolwork. My son has some wonderful traits but all his teachers see are the negative sides! Yup, 10,000 yrs ago, it was the restless kid who invented the wheel, 4,000 years ago it was the restless kid who came up w/ the concept of monotheism, since…it was the restless kid who came up with the telescope, the theory of gravity, the concept of germs, the polio vaccine, the internal combustion engine, the Cistine chapel, the Oracle at Delphi, the journey across the Atlantic, the covered-wagons across the American West. It’s the restless kid that runs into burning buildings with a firehose, jumps out of airplanes over Afghanistan with a rifle, and drives the economy on the NYSE floor. Early last century, a man who couldn’t keep the ‘racing thoughts’ out of his head wroted down E=mc^2–touching off perhaps 500 years of new possibilities in physics. Today, it’s the restless kids who are drugged so that they can do the unnatural: sit at a desk for 7 hrs in the prime of their childhood, training to sit in a desk for 40 years until retirement.

You’ve written a lot to agree with; but I find the last bit quite off the mark. I have raised two daughters, one of whom is clearly inattentive ADHD. Both prospered through public school and both are successful today in their lives and careers. The reason their experience in school and beyond has been so successful is quite simple: their parents were pro-actively involved in their education from the beginning. Any education program depends upon a certain amount of participation in order to work–but absent that participation (and often pro-active parenting), with overcrowded and underfunded classrooms it’s not at all surprising that *many* kids (not just those who are ADHD) may languish. If you hang around ASAD for any length of time, you’ll learn just how pro-active parents are for their kids. PS: I don’t have any kids, but I am, myself ADD…

With respect, this explains a great deal. Joe Parsons

Response:

Yup, 10,000 yrs ago, it was the restless kid who invented the wheel, 4,000 years ago it was the restless kid who came up w/ the concept of monotheism, since…it was the restless kid who came up with the telescope, the theory of gravity, the concept of germs, the polio vaccine, the internal combustion engine, the Cistine chapel, the Oracle at Delphi, the journey across the Atlantic, the covered-wagons across the American West. It’s the restless kid that runs into burning buildings with a firehose, jumps out of airplanes over Afghanistan with a rifle, and drives the economy on the NYSE floor. Early last century, a man who couldn’t keep the ‘racing thoughts’ out of his head wroted down E=mc^2–touching off perhaps 500 years of new possibilities in physics. Today, it’s the restless kids who are drugged so that they can do the unnatural: sit at a desk for 7 hrs in the prime of their childhood, training to sit in a desk for 40 years until retirement. Sorry Mrs. Wendy…was I ranting again? =] PS: I don’t have any kids, but I am, myself ADD…and while I’ve done none of these things (except for jumping out of a plane over Afghanistan…and struggling to sit in a desk for 7 hrs at the age of 10), I’ve discovered since I’ve started studying history that everyone who was anyone in history (with very few exceptions) exibited traits that would have them on medication today. -TacoKeeses

Response:

I am very sorry to hear that. My kids’ teachers do appreciate their good sides, and it makes a huge difference. I hope you have more luck next year.

Response:

Christian Metal is an oxymoron.

admin — Wed, 07 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

You know, in the 1920’s people rejected gospel music because the singers had… gasp.. a piano. In those days, everyone knew that the piano was the devil’s instrument. So, don’t listen to the horse hockey that says that any genre of music can’t be used to praise God… you can head bang for God, you can rap and hip-hop and break dance for God… you can achy breaky line dance for God…

You can kill jews and christians for SATAN. Metal rejects GOD. If you make ‘metal’ for GOD, you reject METAL. GOD is…. GAY. Dwaallicht

Response:

you can kill non-jews and non-christians for satan. Satan excepts offerings also… Metal rejects GOD. If you make ‘metal’ for GOD, you reject METAL.

Metal isn’t so much about rejecting God. More its about thinking for yourself, being an individual. Questioning your beliefs.Understanding the world around you… A god is whatever you offer your heart to. Some people make Metal their god. Some people make the television their god. GOD is…. GAY.

such a foolish proof and arguement. Where did you learn to use such dreadfull arguements. Military School??? Baaa you fucking sheep baa… Dwaallicht

burp? J.

Response:

Metal rejects GOD. If you make ‘metal’ for GOD, you reject METAL. Metal isn’t so much about rejecting God. More its about thinking for yourself, being an individual. Questioning your beliefs.Understanding the world around you… So you agree, then, that metal rejects god =)

So you agree then, that there is a God who is rejected by metal….? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -E. — Every time you play a metal CD, it makes jesus cry

Response:

Yes, and part of that is rejecting g0D. I didn’t say that it SOLELY was about rejecting g0D. BUT since people here on Usenet have reading cancer in a terminal stadium I’m not surprised about your reaction. GOD is…. GAY. such a foolish proof and arguement.

Hahaha, ‘proof and argument’…. arguments are gay. Semantics are gay. Usenet is fucking gay. Where did you learn to use such dreadfull arguements. Military School??? Baaa you fucking sheep baa…

That was gay as well. But I don’t care, as long as you keep that metal spinning… even if you’re gay. Dwaallicht

Response:

So you agree, then, that metal rejects god =) So you agree then, that there is a God who is rejected by metal….?

If gOD did exist, it would be necessary to kill him. — Shareware computer games – http://rainerdeyke.com "In ihren Reihen zu stehen heisst unter Feinden zu kaempfen" – Abigor

Response:

christians = losers. better luck next time. E. — Every time you play a metal CD, it makes jesus cry

Response:

So you agree, then, that metal rejects god =) E. — Every time you play a metal CD, it makes jesus cry

Response:

This music was created to reject God. To attempt to make music in "God’s name" within the metal genre is to attempt to destroy metal. Judeo-Christianity is the problem. After the Holocaust II, we’ll have fewer Christians and kikes to populate planet earth.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You know, in the 1920’s people rejected gospel music because the singers had… gasp.. a piano. In those days, everyone knew that the piano was the devil’s instrument. So, don’t listen to the horse hockey that says that any genre of music can’t be used to praise God… you can head bang for God, you can rap and hip-hop and break dance for God… you can achy breaky line dance for God… Vom feuer schmeck es besser http://www.dwacon.com

Response:

…you can sodomize the twitching corpse of god. E. — Every time you play a metal CD, it makes jesus cry

Response:

God is a fucking liar who will take your civil rights and replace them with Israeli propaganda. Watch Your Rights Vanish Before Your Eyes http://www.ncac.org/issues/freeex911.html

Response:

Oh no! You hate gays. Go figure, you fucking Christian. I hate Christians. Humanity has run out of direction: – Fighting between ourselves over superstitions. – Lack of respect for nature or each other. – Desire for revenge against the society we’ve created. The solution is better design. We have created forums for those who wish to discuss the removal of Judeo-Christianity and the possibility of finding better social systems. – No superstition. – No rejection of nature/evolution. – No embrace of comforting but illogical social convention. If you have the ability to move beyond the intellectual training pants of humanity, please join us at the following forums: * http://www.amerika.org/ is home to the Osama bin Laden home- page and the "Death to Israel" mailing list * http://www.hessian.org/ has forums and activism resources for headbangers or anyone else who dislikes Judeo-Christianity. * http://www.fuckchrist.com/ explains why Judeo-Christianity is insane, what it is and how you can change it. If you have any questions about these forums or this posting, please Copyright (c) 2001 hessian.org and al-Qaeda Vinland

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This guys is quite possible the biggest closet homosexual I have ever seen in my life. Please go back to slamming your little brothers ass until you have proven yourself to your authoritarian father, worthy to suck the dicks of him and all the other fucking ragheads he orgies with. "Adolf bin Laden von Kali Hitler (Death to Israel, Separate the Races, Of course it is. Anything Christians or Jews produce in the arts is propaganda for their insane religion and morality and nothing more. The gas ovens and crosses await these lying superstitious fucks. Humanity has run out of direction:

Response:

There is no legitimacy to Christianity in metal. Christian definitions won’t prove it to us either. Humanity has run out of direction: – Fighting between ourselves over superstitions. – Lack of respect for nature or each other. – Desire for revenge against the society we’ve created. The solution is better design. We have created forums for those who wish to discuss the removal of Judeo-Christianity and the possibility of finding better social systems. – No superstition. – No rejection of nature/evolution. – No embrace of comforting but illogical social convention. If you have the ability to move beyond the intellectual training pants of humanity, please join us at the following forums: * http://www.amerika.org/ is home to the Osama bin Laden home- page and the "Death to Israel" mailing list * http://www.hessian.org/ has forums and activism resources for headbangers or anyone else who dislikes Judeo-Christianity. * http://www.fuckchrist.com/ explains why Judeo-Christianity is insane, what it is and how you can change it. If you have any questions about these forums or this posting, please Copyright (c) 2001 hessian.org and al-Qaeda Vinland

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Of course it is. Anything Christians or Jews produce in the arts is propaganda for their insane religion and morality and nothing more. The gas ovens and crosses await these lying superstitious fucks. and this posting is not propoganda for your religion. yes your proposal is a religion. All are. People who say they are not religious usually have no idea what religion is. Religion is not going to church on sundays (or saturdays) religion is a set of rules, or a moral code, by which you live your life. Humanity has run out of direction: – Fighting between ourselves over superstitions. – Lack of respect for nature or each other. – Desire for revenge against the society we’ve created. The solution is better design. We have created forums for those who wish to discuss the removal of Judeo-Christianity and the possibility of finding better social systems. Obviously Judeo-Christianity is so completely wrong, and you guys are so right. and in your rightness you have decided that because Judeo-Christianity is soooo wrong, nobody should follow it. YOU should brainwash people into beliveing that Judeo-Christianity is wrong and that you are right. – No superstition. – No rejection of nature/evolution. some people need hard proof to believe things. other people (christians AND evolutionists) have faith. – No embrace of comforting but illogical social convention. like what, that silly idea that sex before marriage is not good for you. Hey if you want to take the risks of disease and unwanted pregnancy, go ahead. Because really it is about choice. Letting people have the choice, not choosing for them. This is what is wrong with christian fundamentalism, the same thing that is wrong with you. You can’t let people choose for themselves, because they are being brainwashed. instead they must be brainwashed by you. Think, ask questions. the sooner people figure out (christians included) that Christianity is about loving your neighbour and not about killing people who don’t agree with you, the better this world will be. J.

Response:

Oh no! You hate gays. Go figure, you fucking Christian.

i don’t hate gays, i have no reason to. I hate Christians.

why? Because some of us are actually fulfilled, are actually living lives filled with promise and hope while you sit and suffer? Humanity has run out of direction…

yes, it has. Nihilism is starting to come back into full force, just as it did before the fall of the roman empire, the british empire… nihilism is a necessary stage in Society. Once we reach full nihilism, society will be very close to collapsing. Then someone else takes control and is the leader in the world for however many years. Isn’t it just hilarious how this world of ours goes round… J.

Response:

This guys is quite possible the biggest closet homosexual I have ever seen in my life. Please go back to slamming your little brothers ass until you have proven yourself to your authoritarian father, worthy to suck the dicks of him and all the other fucking ragheads he orgies with. "Adolf bin Laden von Kali Hitler (Death to Israel, Separate the Races, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Of course it is. Anything Christians or Jews produce in the arts is propaganda for their insane religion and morality and nothing more. The gas ovens and crosses await these lying superstitious fucks. Humanity has run out of direction:

Response:

Of course it is. Anything Christians or Jews produce in the arts is propaganda for their insane religion and morality and nothing more. The gas ovens and crosses await these lying superstitious fucks. Humanity has run out of direction: – Fighting between ourselves over superstitions. – Lack of respect for nature or each other. – Desire for revenge against the society we’ve created. The solution is better design. We have created forums for those who wish to discuss the removal of Judeo-Christianity and the possibility of finding better social systems. – No superstition. – No rejection of nature/evolution. – No embrace of comforting but illogical social convention. If you have the ability to move beyond the intellectual training pants of humanity, please join us at the following forums: * http://www.amerika.org/ is home to the Osama bin Laden home- page and the "Death to Israel" mailing list * http://www.hessian.org/ has forums and activism resources for headbangers or anyone else who dislikes Judeo-Christianity. * http://www.fuckchrist.com/ explains why Judeo-Christianity is insane, what it is and how you can change it. If you have any questions about these forums or this posting, please Copyright (c) 2001 hessian.org and al-Qaeda Vinland

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ever heard of Satanic Death Gospel? Of course you haven’t. This is because christians steal all good ideas they encouter and pervert them to their own sick desires. The "devil" himself is nothing but an inversion of the much cooler Pagan gods the christians wish they could have thought up. Christians are so pitiful and hypocrittical that I am forced to laugh when ever I hear one speak, let alone try to play metal. Let’s face it. All the early Hebrew religion was stolen from Babylonian myths anyway. It’s tie people stopped taking these Jew-worshipping sheep seriously before they go back to being the worst terrorists in the world. Osama and his buddies got a long way to go before they even kill half as many innocent people as fundamentalist christians! Death to the hollow death-worshipping philosophy of Jesu the Christ and all those stupid "Christian Intellectuals" (another oxymoron)! If they want paradise after death, I say send them there! I would rather not waste my entire life wanting to die so I could hang out with soe megalomaniac vengeful Jewish deity. Oh, and Stryper sucks! Ave Satanas!

Response:

and this posting is not propoganda for your religion. yes your proposal is a religion. All are. People who say they are not religious usually have no idea what religion is. Religion is not going to church on sundays (or saturdays) religion is a set of rules, or a moral code, by which you live your life. Humanity has run out of direction: – Fighting between ourselves over superstitions. – Lack of respect for nature or each other. – Desire for revenge against the society we’ve created. The solution is better design. We have created forums for those who wish to discuss the removal of Judeo-Christianity and the possibility of finding better social systems.

Obviously Judeo-Christianity is so completely wrong, and you guys are so right. and in your rightness you have decided that because Judeo-Christianity is soooo wrong, nobody should follow it. YOU should brainwash people into beliveing that Judeo-Christianity is wrong and that you are right. – No superstition. – No rejection of nature/evolution.

some people need hard proof to believe things. other people (christians AND evolutionists) have faith. – No embrace of comforting but illogical social convention.

like what, that silly idea that sex before marriage is not good for you. Hey if you want to take the risks of disease and unwanted pregnancy, go ahead. Because really it is about choice. Letting people have the choice, not choosing for them. This is what is wrong with christian fundamentalism, the same thing that is wrong with you. You can’t let people choose for themselves, because they are being brainwashed. instead they must be brainwashed by you. Think, ask questions. the sooner people figure out (christians included) that Christianity is about loving your neighbour and not about killing people who don’t agree with you, the better this world will be. J.

Response:

You eBayers are all worthless parasites!!!

admin — Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

"You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages." At least we are equal opportunists — David Saad Muzo Mine Emerald Co. Click here to search our auctions: http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/davesaad/

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just wanted to say that you are all worthless parasites, not producing anything. You prey on vulnerable poor indidivuals, selling off their last possessions, and then reselling them to rich suckers. That is hardly a model for an upstanding citizen. I wonder if any of you have kids, and what you teach them. Do you teach them to be social leeches like yourselves? That is shameful. Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages.

Response:

*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeeds.com *** ……and I love it….. buy a camera for $2 at an estate sale and sell it for $400 on ebay……. Last I check the United States was a free country…..? (If you live in the U.S.) You don’t like it….. don’t bid…. Man some people……. I auctioned off a new Handera 330 (New Palm PDA) a few weeks ago for $600…. you can buy them for $350 but they are major back-ordered……. Man you would not believe how many people e-mailed me whining and complaing "Thats not fair….. your trying to rip people off…" anyways… Nice try Troll.

I just wanted to say that you are all worthless parasites, not producing anything. You prey on vulnerable poor indidivuals, selling off their last possessions, and then reselling them to rich suckers. That is hardly a model for an upstanding citizen. I wonder if any of you have kids, and what you teach them. Do you teach them to be social leeches like yourselves? That is shameful. Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages.

—–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 90,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

My best one,a few weeks ago at a church sale,a Strawberry Shortcake house with tons of extra’s,bought for $8,sold for $750 total last week.Also the $5 Intellivision for $5 sold for $160,and the box of gi joe vehichles,$25,sold for over $450.America’s great,beside’s,We’re the one’s getting up early,the gas to all the garage sale’s,even the crappy one’s.We spend the time to list and pack and photograph etc.

Response:

Can you spell "Troll"? I knew that you could. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I just wanted to say that you are all worthless parasites, not producing anything. You prey on vulnerable poor indidivuals, selling off their last possessions, and then reselling them to rich suckers. That is hardly a model for an upstanding citizen. I wonder if any of you have kids, and what you teach them. Do you teach them to be social leeches like yourselves? That is shameful. Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages.

Response:

p.s. for a troll or activist – he gets extra bonus points (to spend on leisure products from his favorite multi-national company) for correct spelling, grammar and complete sentances. A refreshing change from what normally comes from such a poster.

You do not get credit for correct spelling, though. Perhaps, rather than trying to scam economically oppressed individuals of their hard earned money, you should learn how to spell the word "sentEnce". You do, however, get a bonus point for undisputable civility in the face of well deserved criticism. -JE

Response:

that mean I am (temporarily) no longer "a worthless parasite"? Hopefully I will be able to resume my parasitic practices when I return from vacation.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can you spell "Troll"? I knew that you could. I just wanted to say that you are all worthless parasites, not producing anything. You prey on vulnerable poor indidivuals, selling off their last possessions, and then reselling them to rich suckers. That is hardly a model for an upstanding citizen. I wonder if any of you have kids, and what you teach them. Do you teach them to be social leeches like yourselves? That is shameful. Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages.

Response:

Oh Jason, a man after my own heart, so to speak….How polite. (True, I often have spelling mistakes….nature of this beast who does not have spell check and didn’t learn standard English as a child) You are now my second favorite poster after Doris Schmitz. Or the person pretending to be Doris Schmitz, or the person pretending to be the person pretending to be Doris. Oh, I don’t know – it gets so complicated. Too bad we don’t have a feedback forum for trolls like we do for eBay members. You surely would be an AAAAAAA+++++++ in my book! So, have you ever bought or sold anything on eBay? And do your feelings go for only certain sellers on eBay or anyone engaged in retailing in general. What are your feelings on wholesale selling? -wherzmypants

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – p.s. for a troll or activist – he gets extra bonus points (to spend on leisure products from his favorite multi-national company) for correct spelling, grammar and complete sentances. A refreshing change from what normally comes from such a poster. You do not get credit for correct spelling, though. Perhaps, rather than trying to scam economically oppressed individuals of their hard earned money, you should learn how to spell the word "sentEnce". You do, however, get a bonus point for undisputable civility in the face of well deserved criticism. -JE

Response:

*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeeds.com *** Just curious….. what did you do? heyday

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Does that mean I am (temporarily) no longer "a worthless parasite"? Hopefully I will be able to resume my parasitic practices when I return from vacation. Can you spell "Troll"? I knew that you could. I just wanted to say that you are all worthless parasites, not producing anything. You prey on vulnerable poor indidivuals, selling off their last possessions, and then reselling them to rich suckers. That is hardly a model for an upstanding citizen. I wonder if any of you have kids, and what you teach them. Do you teach them to be social leeches like yourselves? That is shameful. Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages.

—–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 90,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

Does that mean I am (temporarily) no longer "a worthless parasite"?

Redemption through suspension! And to think I’ve been going to confession all these years….. -wherzmypants

Response:

*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeeds.com *** ya buddy

Does that mean I am (temporarily) no longer "a worthless parasite"? Redemption through suspension! And to think I’ve been going to confession all these years….. -wherzmypants

—–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 90,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages.

Someone outbid you on something you desparately wanted? Or nobody bid on your auctions? I’m playing the world’s smallest violin for you… then I’ll auction it off on eBay — Rid

Response:

Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages. Someone outbid you on something you desparately wanted? Or nobody bid on your auctions? I’m playing the world’s smallest violin for you… then I’ll auction it off on eBay — Rid

No no, don’t! I’ll trade you my human decency and sense of shame for it. I’ve always wanted to play the violin. Snarkbunny. (who’s local mosquitos must be heavy into cannibalism)

Response:

YEAH! and proud of it, dammit! And all day long on those Saturdays where I deign to appear at worthy garage and estate sales, I leave the car idling with the AC set to 62 degrees, belching toxic gases into the environment (the car, not me)- whoops, there goes another rain forest monkey. And if I have any kids, I’ll teach the bastards how to use a gas mask and dress warm – because I plan to use everything up!

Response:

I’ve got the kavorka, Jason Evans, the lure of the animal. I’m dangerous! I just wanted to say that you are all worthless parasites, not producing anything.

As a childfree individual, I sure as hell hope I’m not producing anything You prey on vulnerable poor indidivuals, selling off their last possessions,

The only poor individual I prey on is me. Everyone else is a non-poor corporation. and then reselling them to rich suckers.

You don’t have to be rich to buy my stuff. I sell it for less than I bought it. I just want to get rid of it. You want some? That is hardly a model for an upstanding citizen.

"Upstanding citizen"? You take that back! I wonder if any of you have kids,

Please strike me dead, first. and what you teach them. Do you teach them to be social leeches like yourselves? That is shameful.

As a Canadian, I’m proud to be a social leech. My taxes damn well pay for it. Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable.

…except fertilzer and methane. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages.

Well, at least I’m not discriminating against anyone. Equal opportunity rules! [ Yeah yeah, I know, don't feed the trolls.... I couldn't resist ] — -=- ALL I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT LIFE I LEARNED FROM SEINFELD -=- Two cups in front, two loops in back. I got it. -=- Why would I be a leg man? I don’t need legs. I have legs. -=- Swim Wear. Evening wear. Talent. POISE! -=- Soup is not a meal. -=- If every instinct you have is wrong, then the OPPOSITE must be right. -=- Tub is love. -=- Moses was a picker. -=- Nobody tells me "It’s them, not me." If it’s anybody, it’s ME! -=- It’s "Moops" -=- It shrinks. -=- They’re real, and they’re specTACular!

Response:

God, I LOVE CAPITALISM! :) I just wanted to say that you are all worthless parasites, not producing anything. You prey on vulnerable poor indidivuals, selling off their last possessions, and then reselling them to rich suckers. That is hardly a model for an upstanding citizen. I wonder if any of you have kids, and what you teach them. Do you teach them to be social leeches like yourselves? That is shameful. Wake up people. You are not producing anything valuable. You are simply exploiting vulnerable people of all races and ages.

Response:

Doris? TS

Response:

Another satisfied customer.. AQ

Response:

Hmm. Everything I’ve ever sold on ebay I bought from huge corporations, and tired of either looking at/playing with. It’s hard somehow for me to grasp that Enesco, Mattel, EA etc are so poor and vulnerable. I may weep openly when it does. AQ

Response:

I don’t think so – whole sentences are involved. AQ

Response:

You’re partially correct. Many ebay sellers are parasites. But a lot aren’t. Do some more research and come back with a more accurate indictment. Vic www.aboutpdx.com

Response:

I agree. A few years ago I went to a collectibles show in Portland, bought 10 of an X-Files Video Release Poster for a buck a piece. I put each individual one up with an opening bid of a buck plus $4.00 for priority mail shipping. They were each going off for $80-$90 a piece. My attitude is if you can’t afford it, don’t bid on it. No one forced you to place your bid.

vehichles,$25,sold for – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – over $450.America’s great,beside’s,We’re the one’s getting up early,the gas to all the garage sale’s,even the crappy one’s.We spend the time to list and pack and photograph etc.

Response:

I just wanted to say that you are all worthless parasites

HAW, JJ!! — Mac (doogle)

Response:

Troll-meter: 0 — 1 — 2 — 3 — 4 — 5 — 6 — 7 — 8 — 9 — 10 ^ | Very good showing, sir! Nice troll. -Bob

Response:

At first thought, I thought Mommy and Daddy must have left their computer on again and Jr. found it…..but in reading the headers – this was posted through at least two annonymous posting services: anon.lcs.mit.edu and nym.alias.net and might be the work of a troll. But on the other hand, www.zmag.org (the claimed poster’s claimed e-mail address domain) is a sight for social change and activism. In any case – go away. -wherzmypants p.s. for a troll or activist – he gets extra bonus points (to spend on leisure products from his favorite multi-national company) for correct spelling, grammar and complete sentances. A refreshing change from what normally comes from such a poster.

Response:

U.S. Anglicans

admin — Wed, 07 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too. Greetings, Paul – Insofar as the AMiA professes to remain part of the current Anglican Communion, then I don’t think that one argue that the organization represents the formation of another continuing church – but the establishment of an organization for Anglicans in limbo. I look upon the AMiA as representative of a growing number of disaffected Angicans – many of whom would be better off in one of the established continuing churches. Long-time ties are difficult to break, however, and I expect that those who are part of the AMiA are just reluctant to cut their ties with Canterbury. I have noticed, however, that the leadership of the AMiA appears to be strongly evangelical. Many – probably most – of the continuing churches are more traditionally Anglo-Catholic and less evangelical than the AMiA. As for the Reformed Episcopal Church – I’ll have to admit that I don’t know much about it, except that it appears to be too far on the Protestant side of Anglianism for my comfort. What do you know about the REC?

Bruce, I visited with them for about a year. They were once strongly Evangelical, but under the leadership of Bishops Riches, Sutton, Finch and Grote, are moving in a strongly catholic direction. Their seminary in Philadelphia is all but defunct due to waning interest, and the extremely low (Calvinistic) North-East Churches exist mainly on endowments. The seminary in Shreveport (Cranmer Theological House) is almost entirely bankrolled by a retired ECUSA priest who pretty much micro-manages much of the ethos of the "new and improved" REC. There is nothing now anything distinctly "reformed" or "evangelical" or "low" about this denomination. Despite very strong language in their constitutions preventing them from going in an Anglo-Catholic direction, that’s the direction they are headed. They are now indistinguishable from many of the other high-church continuing church initiatives (they just entered into fellowship with the APA, a very high Church province. This would have been unthinkable 50 years ago.). My guess is that they are positing themselves to catch as many rotten fruit that continues to fall out of the withering tree of ECUSA. r, paul

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was also amased to find two Epsicopal churches in tiny Alpine (pop ca 10,000) one of which was EMC. Do you know much about EMC, I kind of think they tend to the Protestant side because I met one of the members and had a brief conversation, (she was a very angry person)This woman claimed they never used incense and did got "go overboard on the ‘ritualistic’ things". My parish, St. Francis (Austin, Texas), is affiliated with the EMC. WE tend to be more on the Catholic side of the faith in terms of churchmanship, etc. Ritual is VERY important in this parish, so I am sure that the lady you met in Alpine would feel very uncomfortable attending mass with us. (The holy water font by the door would likely elicit an immediate conniption fit.) Having lived in west Texas a good many years, I’ll wager that the lady you spoke with grew up in a low-church tradition – or in what has been called "Morning Prayer country" in Texas. Typically, many of the parishes in west Texas are/were low-church, tending very strongly to the more

protestant side Do you remeber Bishop Quarterman? He actually forbade the use of Tabernacles/aumbrys, and Mass vestments in the entire diocese. This was before my time, but I have had vivid descriptions given me bu several Clerics in NW Texas. Where in West Texas did you live? I am currently in Odessa. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of Anglicanism. Catholicism – and anything thing smacks of Catholicism – is highly suspect among a good many west Texans. I’m sure that I would be as uncomfortable in her parish as she would in mine. Regards All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups, available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

Do you remeber Bishop Quarterman? He actually forbade the use of Tabernacles/aumbrys, and Mass vestments in the entire diocese. This was before my time, but I have had vivid descriptions given me bu several Clerics in NW Texas.

No – Quarterman doesn’t sound familiar. I assume he’s gone now? Where in West Texas did you live? I am currently in Odessa.

I lived in Midland for five years (1981 – 1986). My career as a consultant (hydrogeologist) has taken me back many, many, many times for a good many months. My in-laws live in Midland. Next time I’m back for the weekend, I’ll look forward to attending mass at St. Paul’s Anglican Church (Midland). St. Paul’s is affiliated with the Anglican Church in America. Regards – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of Anglicanism. Catholicism – and anything thing smacks of Catholicism – is highly suspect among a good many west Texans. I’m sure that I would be as uncomfortable in her parish as she would in mine. Regards All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups, available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

This is probably true, in a general way. The churches I have attended in Big Spring (St Mary the Virgin with icons, statuary, an Our Lady of Walsingham shrine) Midland, (both) Odessa,(both) Snyder,(now closed after an unfortunate experiment with the Lutherans) Lubbock,(St Christophers), and El Paso (St. Albans), were definetely not low. But when visiting other cities, I do tend to seek out the highest church in town. What really amazes me is how conservatism has united both the "spikes" and the morning prayer, (no priest, just a minister) traditions. tending very strongly to the more protestant side – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of Anglicanism. Catholicism – and anything thing smacks of Catholicism – is highly suspect among a good many west Texans. I’m sure that I would be as uncomfortable in her parish as she would in mine. Regards All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups, available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

What does AMiA stand for? All my search engine came up with is medically related. Joseph – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S. Hmm…) Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church. All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Bruce; Hal, We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too. Even though they started with a pretty low view of the Episcopate, their orders were then not disputed by their Anglo Catholic antagonists within PECUSA – and as a matter of public record, their initial intention to become a sort of ecumenical umbrella for protestantism never materialized, so their orders were never compromised for such a project (similar to what ECUSA has done in its own recent ecumenical initiative by suspending the ordinal). r, paul

Response:

There are parrishes of the EMC in Ft. Davis and Alpine Texas. I discovered this during a recent week-end vacation. I was also amased to find two Epsicopal churches in tiny Alpine (pop ca 10,000) one of which was EMC. Do you know much about EMC, I kind of think they tend to the Protestant side because I met one of the members and had a brief conversation, (she was a very angry person)This woman claimed they never used incense and did got "go overboard on the ‘ritualistic’ things". – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups, available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

"AMiA" = Anglican Mission in America. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – What does AMiA stand for? All my search engine came up with is medically related. Joseph I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S. Hmm…) Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church. All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Bruce; Hal, We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too. Even though they started with a pretty low view of the Episcopate, their orders were then not disputed by their Anglo Catholic antagonists within PECUSA – and as a matter of public record, their initial intention to become a sort of ecumenical umbrella for protestantism never materialized, so their orders were never compromised for such a project (similar to what ECUSA has done in its own recent ecumenical initiative by suspending the ordinal). r, paul

Response:

I was also amased to find two Epsicopal churches in tiny Alpine (pop ca 10,000) one of which was EMC. Do you know much about EMC, I kind of think they tend to the Protestant side because I met one of the members and had a brief conversation, (she was a very angry person)This woman claimed they never used incense and did got "go overboard on the ‘ritualistic’ things".

My parish, St. Francis (Austin, Texas), is affiliated with the EMC. WE tend to be more on the Catholic side of the faith in terms of churchmanship, etc. Ritual is VERY important in this parish, so I am sure that the lady you met in Alpine would feel very uncomfortable attending mass with us. (The holy water font by the door would likely elicit an immediate conniption fit.) Having lived in west Texas a good many years, I’ll wager that the lady you spoke with grew up in a low-church tradition – or in what has been called "Morning Prayer country" in Texas. Typically, many of the parishes in west Texas are/were low-church, tending very strongly to the more protestant side of Anglicanism. Catholicism – and anything thing smacks of Catholicism – is highly suspect among a good many west Texans. I’m sure that I would be as uncomfortable in her parish as she would in mine. Regards – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups, available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church. All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups, available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S. Hmm…) Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church. All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury. I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention. I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas. It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city.

Bruce; Hal, We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too. Even though they started with a pretty low view of the Episcopate, their orders were then not disputed by their Anglo Catholic antagonists within PECUSA – and as a matter of public record, their initial intention to become a sort of ecumenical umbrella for protestantism never materialized, so their orders were never compromised for such a project (similar to what ECUSA has done in its own recent ecumenical initiative by suspending the ordinal). r, paul

Response:

We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too.

Greetings, Paul – Insofar as the AMiA professes to remain part of the current Anglican Communion, then I don’t think that one argue that the organization represents the formation of another continuing church – but the establishment of an organization for Anglicans in limbo. I look upon the AMiA as representative of a growing number of disaffected Angicans – many of whom would be better off in one of the established continuing churches. Long-time ties are difficult to break, however, and I expect that those who are part of the AMiA are just reluctant to cut their ties with Canterbury. I have noticed, however, that the leadership of the AMiA appears to be strongly evangelical. Many – probably most – of the continuing churches are more traditionally Anglo-Catholic and less evangelical than the AMiA. As for the Reformed Episcopal Church – I’ll have to admit that I don’t know much about it, except that it appears to be too far on the Protestant side of Anglianism for my comfort. What do you know about the REC? Regards Even though they started with a pretty low view – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of the Episcopate, their orders were then not disputed by their Anglo Catholic antagonists within PECUSA – and as a matter of public record, their initial intention to become a sort of ecumenical umbrella for protestantism never materialized, so their orders were never compromised for such a project (similar to what ECUSA has done in its own recent ecumenical initiative by suspending the ordinal). r, paul

Response:

I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S. Hmm…) Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups, available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I

Non-Catholic curious about Latin Liturgy

admin — Sat, 07 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The recent GIRM, for the Novus Ordo Missae, stated quite clearly that the distinction made in the Roman Catechism was still considered valid. You need to look, yet again, at the numerous posts I’ve made on this passage in the GIRM. It is nonsense. It is self-contradictory. It does not even reference ‘new order’, at points, but rather what you called, the ‘old Mass’, in order to defend ‘new order’, which is a different thing. Moreover, the Novus Ordo was specifically designed by God the Holy Spirit God was not named Bugnini, nor Thurian. God didn’t give us a standard Mass which Ottaviani, Bacci, et al point out was rejected by the bishops, etc. God is not the author of the unholy ’spirit of’. It offends God. We know this because it goes against Catholic teaching. The Intervention was dead on in its criticism of ‘new order’. So was Gamber. So was Dietrich von Hildebrand. So is Davies, and Muggeridge. So was Lefebvre. So have been so many others. It’s a lot for you to deny. one flock, under one shepherd. The phraseology in the old Mass, while theologically accurate, nonetheless could be construed to imply a certain elitism The ‘new order’ contains a genuine elitism. The Mass has nothing of the kind. Elitism suggests unfair privilege, something unwarranted, undue, unearned. In ‘new order’, the thing echoes with the grasping arrogance of libral power – forced on the faithful Catholics of the day, as Cranmer knew ‘what was best’, as Cranmer was similarly an enemy of The Church. To sum up: "Many will," expresses the same truth as "All may," Even just at that, and whether or not it reads ‘many will’, the two are not equivalent. All may does not imply any will. Many will insists some will. So, I can’t see what you’re getting at when your premise is flawed even in something like this. that "All may," expresses it in a more positive manner, There is nothing negative about the consecration formula of The Holy Mass, in the qualitative sense you imply. It’s very positive. ‘New order’, rather, presents a negative view of salvation, by treating people who might be serious to a frivilous performance and a substitute rite. It’s as if to say that the home you came to has been sold to strangers – that your true family is gone – abandon all hope, all ye who enter. You need to think on this stuff. You really do. When God intends to do something, Mark, He first informs His Prophets of His intentions Give up this G o G fetish of yours. Confess The Church. Confess Catholicism. Be serious. You think you can fool me, or someone else. You really don’t think much of God, though. You can’t fool God. Simple reality. intentions. And in the process of bringing all baptized Christians into His One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, He is simultaneously gathering His entire world on Earth into His Church. Yeah. Called the false prophet of the anti-Christ – the one-world religion – the enemy of The Church. You hope for abomination, and are too deluded, too proud, or too dumb to know it. Just my opinion. This is *not* Universalism No. Because it excludes one particular group – Catholics, orthodox Catholics, and even perhaps some ‘born-again’ heretics. Other than that – ’tis. individually. The exercise of free will involves the voluntary renunciation of all sin, both mortal and venial, or, the opposite decision — entry into sin with finality. Well, again just my opinion, here – but let’s hope you change your mind, then. Go along with worldly schemes. Or realize the simple truth – A) our flesh dies, B) we are judged, C) you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can never fool God. See the sig.

Personally, I would rather not be in schism from the Bishop of Rome when that time comes. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Peace. One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot discern truth from lies. Another is when they don’t even bother to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear. [Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]

Response:

I told you I was done arguing the point with you, and this time, I meant it. This subject is not something I care to debate with you further. I will answer some of the other things you have seen fit to paint me black about. When God intends to do something, Mark, He first informs His Prophets of His intentions Give up this G o G fetish of yours. Confess The Church. Confess Catholicism. Be serious. You think you can fool me, or someone else. You really don’t think much of God, though. You can’t fool God. Simple reality.

Actually, I will not answer that. I am happy to be abused at your hands for the sake of the truth, which I love — and I don’t care what your opinion is of my love for truth. intentions. And in the process of bringing all baptized Christians into His One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, He is simultaneously gathering His entire world on Earth into His Church. Yeah. Called the false prophet of the anti-Christ – the one-world religion – the enemy of The Church. You hope for abomination, and are too deluded, too proud, or too dumb to know it. Just my opinion.

"The earth shall be filled with knowledge of the Lord, as water covers the sea." — just Isaias’ opinion, or God the Holy Spirit? (Isaias 11:9) "Seven thousand persons were killed during the earthquake; the rest were so terrified that they worshiped the God of heaven." — just Saint John’s opinion, or God the Holy Spirit? (Apocalypse 11:13) This is *not* Universalism No. Because it excludes one particular group – Catholics, orthodox Catholics, and even perhaps some ‘born-again’ heretics. Other than that – ’tis.

You obviously have no clue what you are talking about, here. The only ones who will be excluded are those who obstinately, to the very end, refuse to give up their sins. And they all will be killed by some plague or another, but definitely all dead by the time the great earthquake is finished, because we know, "the rest" — meaning ALL the rest — "were so terrified that they worshiped the God of heaven." Judgment of the worth or unworth of alleged prophecy is reserved to the Papacy. That, you are aware, but fail to acknowledge, is Catholic doctrine. individually. The exercise of free will involves the voluntary renunciation of all sin, both mortal and venial, or, the opposite decision — entry into sin with finality. Well, again just my opinion, here – but let’s hope you change your mind, then. Go along with worldly schemes. Or realize the simple truth – A) our flesh dies, B) we are judged, C) you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can never fool God. See the sig.

I do not intend to fool anyone. God has granted me extraordinary graces, and I am accepting them — and that, is not anything great about me — it is God Who did this to me. He did it by allowing me to taste some of the torments of hell, if I remained as I was. He did something similar, you may recall, for Saint Teresa of Avila, so there is your theological precedent for that. And what I am saying here, is no way open for any kind of debate. I have told you something of what happened interiorly to me. If you don’t believe me, call me a liar. But the point is not arguable.

Response:

I am going to be as concise as I can, and then I am done arguing with you, Mark. I am going to tell you how *I* reconcile Novus Ordo with the Roman Catechism. If my reasoning is not good enough for you, that is not my fault. My reasoning only has to convince me, no one else. The Roman Catechism said, about the Tridentine Rite, that the words, "for all" were not used, and gave as reason for this, that the fruit of the Sacrament, that is, conversion from sin, did not apply to all indiscriminately but only to those who were united to Christ by charity. Thus, in the Tridentine, "[My Blood] will be shed for you and for many, for the remission of sins." To expand on what the Catechism said: the first phrase, "[My Blood] will be shed for you and for many," defines that group who would receive the benefit described in the second phrase, which is the purpose of Our Lord’s shedding of His Blood — "for the remission of sins." The remission of sins means, very specifically, their cessation in a particular soul. Thus, when the express purpose of the shedding of His Blood is the remission of sins, it is theologically incorrect to couple this with, "for all," because it is obvious that not everyone is willing to renounce all sin. "for you and for all, for the remission of sins," would certainly imply the heresy of Universalism, as if to say that the graces of the Mass were indiscriminately applied to everyone. The recent GIRM, for the Novus Ordo Missae, stated quite clearly that the distinction made in the Roman Catechism was still considered valid. In the Novus Ordo, the words of the consecration are, "[My Blood] will be shed for you and for all, so that sins may be forgiven." Analyzing this as before, we find the first phrase, "for you and for all," defining that group who would receive the benefit described in the second phrase, the purpose of the shedding of Our Lord’s Blood — "so that sins may be forgiven." Thus, when the express purpose of the shedding of His Blood is "so that sins may be forgiven," it is theologically incorrect to couple this with, "for many," because this would imply that not everyone’s sins might be forgiven. "for you and for many, so that sins may be forgiven," directly implies that the Redemption did not apply to all, but only to many, which we know is not the truth. Moreover, the Novus Ordo was specifically designed by God the Holy Spirit, to express the new pastoral directive of Ecumenism, initiated by God the Holy Spirit with the Second Vatican Council, and not to be considered complete until all the baptized are united in one fold, in one flock, under one shepherd. The phraseology in the old Mass, while theologically accurate, nonetheless could be construed to imply a certain elitism, as if to say, Jesus Christ died for Catholics only, and not for all of humanity. The new Mass, which is also theologically accurate, as elucidated above, yet expresses the Catholic Truth in a much more positive manner — Jesus Christ died for all, and all at least have the possibility of salvation. Whether they take advantage of that possibility manifests in exactly whether or not they accept God’s graces of conversion from sin — which begin with the forgiveness of sins, just as it is stated in the Mass. To sum up: "Many will," expresses the same truth as "All may," except that "All may," expresses it in a more positive manner, more in keeping with the *authentic* Spirit of Vatican II — which is nothing if not Ecumenical. When God intends to do something, Mark, He first informs His Prophets of His intentions, and then, He does it. His intentions for the Catholic practice of Ecumenism have already been revealed to the general public as of Vatican II. Thus, He is now carrying out those intentions. And in the process of bringing all baptized Christians into His One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, He is simultaneously gathering His entire world on Earth into His Church. This is *not* Universalism — He is not eliminating free will. But He is requiring the exercise of that free will, now from each of His human creatures individually. The exercise of free will involves the voluntary renunciation of all sin, both mortal and venial, or, the opposite decision — entry into sin with finality.

Response:

The recent GIRM, for the Novus Ordo Missae, stated quite clearly that the distinction made in the Roman Catechism was still considered valid.

You need to look, yet again, at the numerous posts I’ve made on this passage in the GIRM. It is nonsense. It is self-contradictory. It does not even reference ‘new order’, at points, but rather what you called, the ‘old Mass’, in order to defend ‘new order’, which is a different thing. Moreover, the Novus Ordo was specifically designed by God the Holy Spirit

God was not named Bugnini, nor Thurian. God didn’t give us a standard Mass which Ottaviani, Bacci, et al point out was rejected by the bishops, etc. God is not the author of the unholy ’spirit of’. It offends God. We know this because it goes against Catholic teaching. The Intervention was dead on in its criticism of ‘new order’. So was Gamber. So was Dietrich von Hildebrand. So is Davies, and Muggeridge. So was Lefebvre. So have been so many others. It’s a lot for you to deny. one flock, under one shepherd. The phraseology in the old Mass, while theologically accurate, nonetheless could be construed to imply a certain elitism

The ‘new order’ contains a genuine elitism. The Mass has nothing of the kind. Elitism suggests unfair privilege, something unwarranted, undue, unearned. In ‘new order’, the thing echoes with the grasping arrogance of libral power – forced on the faithful Catholics of the day, as Cranmer knew ‘what was best’, as Cranmer was similarly an enemy of The Church. To sum up: "Many will," expresses the same truth as "All may,"

Even just at that, and whether or not it reads ‘many will’, the two are not equivalent. All may does not imply any will. Many will insists some will. So, I can’t see what you’re getting at when your premise is flawed even in something like this. that "All may," expresses it in a more positive manner,

There is nothing negative about the consecration formula of The Holy Mass, in the qualitative sense you imply. It’s very positive. ‘New order’, rather, presents a negative view of salvation, by treating people who might be serious to a frivilous performance and a substitute rite. It’s as if to say that the home you came to has been sold to strangers – that your true family is gone – abandon all hope, all ye who enter. You need to think on this stuff. You really do. When God intends to do something, Mark, He first informs His Prophets of His intentions

Give up this G o G fetish of yours. Confess The Church. Confess Catholicism. Be serious. You think you can fool me, or someone else. You really don’t think much of God, though. You can’t fool God. Simple reality. intentions. And in the process of bringing all baptized Christians into His One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, He is simultaneously gathering His entire world on Earth into His Church.

Yeah. Called the false prophet of the anti-Christ – the one-world religion – the enemy of The Church. You hope for abomination, and are too deluded, too proud, or too dumb to know it. Just my opinion. This is *not* Universalism

No. Because it excludes one particular group – Catholics, orthodox Catholics, and even perhaps some ‘born-again’ heretics. Other than that – ’tis. individually. The exercise of free will involves the voluntary renunciation of all sin, both mortal and venial, or, the opposite decision — entry into sin with finality.

Well, again just my opinion, here – but let’s hope you change your mind, then. Go along with worldly schemes. Or realize the simple truth – A) our flesh dies, B) we are judged, C) you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can never fool God. See the sig. Peace. One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot discern truth from lies. Another is when they don’t even bother to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear. [Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]

Response:

My point, before, was that they, as you, find yourself political bedfellows in defending ‘new order’. Sure, their version of ‘new order’ is whatever is new, next month. But basically they defend the status quo, or particularly their role in what remains of the libral arch-structure within the institutional church, and that heterodox libral structure remains formidable and dominant, from what I can see. Interesting. Even though there is not anything at all of politics in my defense of Holy Mass,

Your defense of ‘new order’. And of course it’s political, as well as heretical. And in either case, you would be in the same camp as the ‘reformers’, here, who also defend ‘new order’, in some form, for probably just all the same reasons you do. You probably picked up some of your very ‘evidence’ and arguments as such, from them. Mark, I would hope you knew me better than that. But I don’t suppose you do, or care to. You just want to pigeonhole me as a liberal, a reformer or (shudder) a "libral". You know the difference then between an old mason and a new, perhaps? I have no idea what that means.

And old liberal at least spoke to liberal ideas. A new libral is just a tyrant. Remember, it’s been the liberals of today, as the one who wrote that article years ago that led me to suggest the difference, who have been shocked at the illiberalism of the typ. Dem and activist – the eastern libral establishment type so commonplace in various industries and sectors, not just public. None of those things matter to me at all. You are the one so into politics, remember? Not me.

It matters to you. If you bothered to pay any attention, you would realize that our viewpoints are not very much different. It’s just that I adhere to Church authority in matters of the liturgy, But you don’t. You "adhere" to churchmen, not to Popes come and gone. Paul VI is come and gone.

So are those before him. You forget to mention that. But tradition is revered particularly because it stays after Popes have died, and orthodox churchmen, too, are dead. You can’t have it both ways, saying you confess the holy see, and then ignore everything done prior to 1965, or whatever post-conciliar year you prefer. I don’t. I don’t even ignore you — but neither do I agree with you. I find no contradiction between what the Popes of the past said, and what this one says.

What has "this one" said, in your opinion? particular axe to grind — so I guess I get chopped with that, and thrown on to the pile with liberals, Adoremians, and anyone else who refuses to swallow the authority of Pope Mark Johnson. But I’m not Pope. damn straight.

Ah – but that’s also the case for someone else, here. Read on: And neither are you. And neither is anyone else here who wants to tweak or ‘do liturgy’, as some suggested. My reply was – with all respect to them – who the heck . . are _you_? No, your complaint isn’t really with me. stop kidding yourself. my complaint really is with you.

It’s with The Church. In other words – who the heck . . . are _you_? I obey The Church. I go to Mass. I didn’t make it up. I didn’t write the music. I didn’t sew the vestments. I wasn’t there when the traditions were founded. And so on. It’s with Trent Trent never said the things you have said about the Mass, of all things.

For this reason – for all – is not used – according to the Catechism of Trent. It’s mentioned, if you forget already, at http://www.geocities.com/ymjcath/MassNote.htm . and Aquinas. nor did Aquinas, nor would he have dared to do so.

Same URL. I quote Aquinas at length. Your argument is with him. It’s with the old GIRM, The old GIRM applies to the old Mass. That is exactly what it is supposed to apply to.

That’s right. It’s not the same as ‘new order’. It’s a different liturgy. ‘New order’ is not The Holy Mass. The Mass is. You’re sort of beginning to inadvertently see it, yourself. Two different things. with the old rubrics, those apply to the old Mass as well. Rubrics are rubrics. They do not affect the consecration,

For this reason – for all – is not used. And even the intention of the priest can invalidate the consecration. That’s even still confessed, today. and are thus immaterial to the gist of *your* argument. Stop throwing red herrings around, and you might become easier to talk to. But I don’t suppose that is in any way your aim.

You want me to ignore Gamber and von Hildebrand, Ottaviani/Bacci/et al, Aquinas and Borromeo, the Catechism and Quo Primum, De Defectibus and Florence, and all the obv. comparisons made between The Holy Mass and this ‘reformist’ substitute called ‘new order’. Then, only then, will I be . . . . "easier to talk to"? Think about what you write. _I_ have reasons for saying what I do. You don’t. I have presented arguments for The Mass, against ‘new order’. You have nothing – other than just following orders, cause the orders could never be wrong, and Popes are never wrong. But they are wrong, in these ‘interesting times’. Churchmen can do the wrong thing. Even Popes. It’s the history of The Church. But ‘new order’ is entirely new in Church history. So the last two Popes are very wrong. You can’t confess that. It scares you, I think. Or you won’t confess it because you like heterodoxy, and hope The Mass never returns to the corner parish, church torn down and rebuilt to Catholic standards. Giving you the benefit of the doubt – if you were Catholic, you would not fear for the visible Church, even if the entire institution seems to have turned to heresy. It hasn’t, not entirely – from what I can see. Maybe the sedes are right. Maybe not. But The Church cannot be overcome – only churchmen. It’s an argument with Catholicism – which you really don’t confess. Your accusation is baseless and false. Take it back.

You confess Catholicism, do you? That means you confess the Magisterium? You confess that Our Lord died for all, but not all are saved? Get back to me on that. I wish you would get it done with and get out of my Church.

But you’re Catholic Reformed. _I’ve_ never been Catholic Reformed. I was raised Catholic, as Catholic. I rejected Catholicism as someone opposed to Catholicism, thanks to a univ indoctrination into Marxism (if you don’t believe it, even generally, check out any college bookstore and course ‘materials’ for sale, even today). I was then a ‘born again’ Prot, after something of a mild ‘Damascus experience’, who rejected Catholicism. And now I’m a faithful Catholic, who can say, in all those years, he never confessed Reformed Catholicism. A lot of ‘cradle Catholics’ have. They are the one’s most in danger of such neo-Protestanism, from their own compromises, delusions, rationalizations, etc. slowly over the years as Cranmer’s, er . . . ’spirit of’, ‘reforms’ were forced on them by the heterodox bishops of the world (cause that’s who really bears responsibility). that you would consider such a position *at all* speaks volumes about your attitude toward Tradition and private judgment.

I don’t think like that. I’m not Catholic Reformed. Don’t project. Yes, do, but I think it was someone who thought, erroneously, as you appraently do, The point is, I was trying to suggest in the context, there, that it was none other than Pope John 23rd. ‘kay?

And he was a Pope, too – correct? The Pope attributed his decision to call the Council to a direct inspiration from God the Holy Spirit — that is what he said. What ever else he may have said, does not change the weight of that.

I’m sure he would have said the same for the whole ’spirit of’? who as von Hildebrand correctly pointed out, took merely the name of the council, and pretty much made up the rest as suited _their_ agenda. The Adoremans complain of this, too. And in this, as in much else of what they say, I believe they are right. But there’s no virtue in following illegal orders. It was wrong to pen up those peaceful protesters at the Algore rally this week. Those guys who followed such orders – shouldn’t have. The system, as such, BREAKS DOWN – when they . . . do. Same for ‘new order’. God the Holy Spirit does not give "illegal orders."

The Pope is not God, Himself. It’s an exalted office, the papacy of The Church. Make no mistake. But he is NOT God. That’s the Prot complaint against Catholics, along with their imputation of impeccability. But no . . . . . Catholic, actually thinks that of His Holiness. And neither does, therefore . . His Holiness. guide His Church when she performs such a solemn task as promulgating the Liturgy of the Mass.

Then the Vatican Council omitted mention of that. It IS similar to Davies arg., I’ll grant you. But I think he’s wrong on this. ‘New order’ is not infallible. I assume that at one time, even you confessed this. But as all ‘new order’ defenders, you have to believe, somewhere deep down, that the only way to save ‘new order’, is to declare the whole thing infallible. Then Aquinas be damned, as it were. Ottaviani rest in peace. Let’s hear no more of catechisms and papal bulls. ‘New order’ is an infallible degree, protected by God, Himself, from any error, from any taint even of heterodoxy – as we all commune in the beingness of blessedness in the gatheringness of the god withinness in usness, as the EMs bless us on the head, and we bow before the cantor as the priest falls asleep waiting for his part to begin, etc. How incredibly ‘Catholic’ it all must seem – to a Protestant. We’ve seen what has happened to the institutional church. It’s in ruins. If you mean to refer to corruption within the priesthood and hierarchy, you speak the truth. It is attributable to sin only, and to the work of Satan. The Holy Mass is *not* the work of Satan.

Bugnini was a mason. Thurian a Prot. The ‘reformers’ have been … read more »

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have just now encountered the CTA (call-to-action) for the very first time. I was looking at the message boards at CIN and someone referenced it. Guess what? I do not agree with them. My point, before, was that they, as you, find yourself political bedfellows in defending ‘new order’. Sure, their version of ‘new order’ is whatever is new, next month. But basically they defend the status quo, or particularly their role in what remains of the libral arch-structure within the institutional church, and that heterodox libral structure remains formidable and dominant, from what I can see.

Interesting. Even though there is not anything at all of politics in my defense of Holy Mass, you call me "political bedfellows" of a group who, near as I can discern, has little more in common with me than the fact that neither of us agrees with your peculiar stance. Mark, I would hope you knew me better than that. But I don’t suppose you do, or care to. You just want to pigeonhole me as a liberal, a reformer or (shudder) a "libral". You know the difference then between an old mason and a new, perhaps?

I have no idea what that means. Remember, it’s been the liberals of today, as the one who wrote that article years ago that led me to suggest the difference, who have been shocked at the illiberalism of the typ. Dem and activist – the eastern libral establishment type so commonplace in various industries and sectors, not just public.

None of those things matter to me at all. You are the one so into politics, remember? Not me. If you bothered to pay any attention, you would realize that our viewpoints are not very much different. It’s just that I adhere to Church authority in matters of the liturgy, But you don’t. You "adhere" to churchmen, not to Popes come and gone.

Paul VI is come and gone. But tradition is revered particularly because it stays after Popes have died, and orthodox churchmen, too, are dead. You can’t have it both ways, saying you confess the holy see, and then ignore everything done prior to 1965, or whatever post-conciliar year you prefer.

I don’t. I don’t even ignore you — but neither do I agree with you. I find no contradiction between what the Popes of the past said, and what this one says. particular axe to grind — so I guess I get chopped with that, and thrown on to the pile with liberals, Adoremians, and anyone else who refuses to swallow the authority of Pope Mark Johnson. But I’m not Pope.

damn straight. And neither are you. And neither is anyone else here who wants to tweak or ‘do liturgy’, as some suggested. My reply was – with all respect to them – who the heck . . are _you_? No, your complaint isn’t really with me.

stop kidding yourself. my complaint really is with you. It’s with Trent

Trent never said the things you have said about the Mass, of all things. and Aquinas.

nor did Aquinas, nor would he have dared to do so. It’s with the old GIRM,

The old GIRM applies to the old Mass. That is exactly what it is supposed to apply to. with the old rubrics,

those apply to the old Mass as well. Rubrics are rubrics. They do not affect the consecration, and are thus immaterial to the gist of *your* argument. Stop throwing red herrings around, and you might become easier to talk to. But I don’t suppose that is in any way your aim. with The Holy Mass itself – quite literally.

I have never, ever, (search deja all you like) said anything was wrong with Holy Mass — whether Tridentine or Novus Ordo. I think you have me confused with you. I revere both as *The Mass*. You are the one who has a complaint with Holy Mass. It’s an argument with Catholicism – which you really don’t confess.

Your accusation is baseless and false. Take it back. By the way — *you* are in "my" Church, along with Mother Angelica, Ted Seeber, and, well, you know — Catholics. Heck, the Pope is even in *my* Church — do you acknowledge the same about him? I’m not a sede. I’m not yet convinced of that. If I were – you’d know about it.

I wish you would get it done with and get out of my Church. The fact that you would consider such a position *at all* speaks volumes about your attitude toward Tradition and private judgment. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Pope John XXIII stated that God the Holy Spirit moved him to call the Council. "Reconvene the Vatican Council? We are infallible enough." I’ll have to check on who is supposed to have said that. Yes, do, but I think it was someone who thought, erroneously, as you appraently do, The point is, I was trying to suggest in the context, there, that it was none other than Pope John 23rd. ‘kay? tried to come up with some documents and have the Pope sign them, and the Pope said, "no, you don’t get it — think a lot bigger than that!" — to that effect. Or he might have said what he is reputed to have said? Could be?

The Pope attributed his decision to call the Council to a direct inspiration from God the Holy Spirit — that is what he said. What ever else he may have said, does not change the weight of that. What you fail to recognize, or acknowledge, about me, is that I am fine with *whatever* the Church does. I will remain faithful, please God. The only reason I defend the Novus Ordo is that it is the official Mass of the Latin Rite. But there’s no virtue in following illegal orders. It was wrong to pen up those peaceful protesters at the Algore rally this week. Those guys who followed such orders – shouldn’t have. The system, as such, BREAKS DOWN – when they . . . do. Same for ‘new order’.

God the Holy Spirit does not give "illegal orders." He does, however, guide His Church when she performs such a solemn task as promulgating the Liturgy of the Mass. We’ve seen what has happened to the institutional church. It’s in ruins.

If you mean to refer to corruption within the priesthood and hierarchy, you speak the truth. It is attributable to sin only, and to the work of Satan. The Holy Mass is *not* the work of Satan. And of course I mean the Holy Mass in every form it has ever taken, right down to the present day. I accept the simple fact that God designs the Mass, not men. You do not accept that simple fact, so you see a conspiracy that "finally got to the Mass." Any trusting, believing Catholic knows that is impossible. That fact even rated a mention in the 3rd Secret of Fatima, as you might have read. The Mass is relegated to the catacombs. Orthodox faithful are mocked by their own pastors and nuncios, and so on. Open your eyes – or you might even miss these ‘interesting times’.

You do not acknowledge the full weight of just how interesting these times are. You still see some political machinery at work, and think it significant in some way. You do not see that God is taking over, probably because you do not want him to take over *you*. Period. If the Church decreed tomorrow that we were to go back to the Tridentine, I would start studying Latin so as to be better able to understand. Sure. Cause like someone else on these ngs – you don’t dare trust the ‘facing pages’?

No, that is not why. But what advantage is found in hearing Mass in a language you don’t understand? God desires to be understood. If you want to go to Mass – go.

I do. That’s what the ‘indult’ is for.

No, the indult is for folks like you. I do not demand that the Mass be in Latin. I trust God. It IS The Magisterium which holds against ‘new order’. It appears invalid on its face. For this reason – FOR ALL – is NOT used! Read that again. Our Lord died for all, but not all are saved. How much clearer can that be? When I take Communion at the Novus Ordo Missae, is there ANYTHING of bread in what I am taking, save the appearance? Or is it the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of my Savior? Read what I write – as it . . is written. ‘New order’ appears invalid on its face. That means the Sacrament . . . isn’t. Again – how much clearer can that be?

The Sacrament … isn’t — what? The sense of your sentences, in accepted English grammar, means that the Sacrament *isn’t* "invalid on its face" — that is the closest referent for your use of "isn’t." But somehow, I do not think that is what you mean to say. So say what you mean. Is it too much to ask you to speak in complete sentences? Do you mean, the Sacrament isn’t invalid, or, the Sacrament isn’t the Sacrament? Be clear. I admit it still might be problematic. But I’ve never seen anything to the contrary – and particularly on UseNet – save for you telling me the Pope is impeccable,

I never said anything remotely like that. Your continual insisting that I did, or that that is what I believe, is scandalously dishonest. the Pope can do no wrong.

And I never said that. I may very well have said the Pope cannot lead the whole Church astray, nor could he, as Pope, solemnly promulgate as The Mass what was not in fact The Mass. I’m sure I said something like that, something which you will not confess. Clearly Paul VI was wrong, and Popes can be wrong.

You can’t use the point you are trying to prove as its own proof. Show me some other Pope who has been wrong, and acknowledged so by the Church, on any matter even close to the gravity of the Liturgy. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If they are perfection, itself, then there’s no such thing as Pope –

Response:

I have just now encountered the CTA (call-to-action) for the very first time. I was looking at the message boards at CIN and someone referenced it. Guess what? I do not agree with them.

My point, before, was that they, as you, find yourself political bedfellows in defending ‘new order’. Sure, their version of ‘new order’ is whatever is new, next month. But basically they defend the status quo, or particularly their role in what remains of the libral arch-structure within the institutional church, and that heterodox libral structure remains formidable and dominant, from what I can see. Mark, I would hope you knew me better than that. But I don’t suppose you do, or care to. You just want to pigeonhole me as a liberal, a reformer or (shudder) a "libral".

You know the difference then between an old mason and a new, perhaps? Remember, it’s been the liberals of today, as the one who wrote that article years ago that led me to suggest the difference, who have been shocked at the illiberalism of the typ. Dem and activist – the eastern libral establishment type so commonplace in various industries and sectors, not just public. If you bothered to pay any attention, you would realize that our viewpoints are not very much different. It’s just that I adhere to Church authority in matters of the liturgy,

But you don’t. You "adhere" to churchmen, not to Popes come and gone. But tradition is revered particularly because it stays after Popes have died, and orthodox churchmen, too, are dead. You can’t have it both ways, saying you confess the holy see, and then ignore everything done prior to 1965, or whatever post-conciliar year you prefer. particular axe to grind — so I guess I get chopped with that, and thrown on to the pile with liberals, Adoremians, and anyone else who refuses to swallow the authority of Pope Mark Johnson.

But I’m not Pope. And neither are you. And neither is anyone else here who wants to tweak or ‘do liturgy’, as some suggested. My reply was – with all respect to them – who the heck . . are _you_? No, your complaint isn’t really with me. It’s with Trent and Aquinas. It’s with the old GIRM, with the old rubrics, with The Holy Mass itself – quite literally. It’s an argument with Catholicism – which you really don’t confess. By the way — *you* are in "my" Church, along with Mother Angelica, Ted Seeber, and, well, you know — Catholics. Heck, the Pope is even in *my* Church — do you acknowledge the same about him?

I’m not a sede. I’m not yet convinced of that. If I were – you’d know about it. Pope John XXIII stated that God the Holy Spirit moved him to call the Council. "Reconvene the Vatican Council? We are infallible enough." I’ll have to check on who is supposed to have said that. Yes, do, but I think it was someone who thought, erroneously, as you appraently do,

The point is, I was trying to suggest in the context, there, that it was none other than Pope John 23rd. ‘kay? tried to come up with some documents and have the Pope sign them, and the Pope said, "no, you don’t get it — think a lot bigger than that!" — to that effect.

Or he might have said what he is reputed to have said? Could be? What you fail to recognize, or acknowledge, about me, is that I am fine with *whatever* the Church does. I will remain faithful, please God. The only reason I defend the Novus Ordo is that it is the official Mass of the Latin Rite.

But there’s no virtue in following illegal orders. It was wrong to pen up those peaceful protesters at the Algore rally this week. Those guys who followed such orders – shouldn’t have. The system, as such, BREAKS DOWN – when they . . . do. Same for ‘new order’. We’ve seen what has happened to the institutional church. It’s in ruins. That fact even rated a mention in the 3rd Secret of Fatima, as you might have read. The Mass is relegated to the catacombs. Orthodox faithful are mocked by their own pastors and nuncios, and so on. Open your eyes – or you might even miss these ‘interesting times’. Period. If the Church decreed tomorrow that we were to go back to the Tridentine, I would start studying Latin so as to be better able to understand.

Sure. Cause like someone else on these ngs – you don’t dare trust the ‘facing pages’? ? If you want to go to Mass – go. That’s what the ‘indult’ is for. Go. No one is stopping you. If your bishop won’t have such, report him. Cause he’s not following orders. And you gotta do that – right? It IS The Magisterium which holds against ‘new order’. It appears invalid on its face. For this reason – FOR ALL – is NOT used! Read that again. Our Lord died for all, but not all are saved. How much clearer can that be? When I take Communion at the Novus Ordo Missae, is there ANYTHING of bread in what I am taking, save the appearance? Or is it the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of my Savior?

Read what I write – as it . . is written. ‘New order’ appears invalid on its face. That means the Sacrament . . . isn’t. Again – how much clearer can that be? I admit it still might be problematic. But I’ve never seen anything to the contrary – and particularly on UseNet – save for you telling me the Pope is impeccable, the Pope can do no wrong. Clearly Paul VI was wrong, and Popes can be wrong. If they are perfection, itself, then there’s no such thing as Pope – and the Prots are right for that very heretical reason. Actually, because of the obstinate attachments — well I don’t know, maybe it’s just nostalgia — of certain people, there are two.

Again – you be sure to get back to me when this unholy substitute thing is put away, for everyone’s sake, to please God, and by His grace and Providence. Then we’ll see how nostaligic _you_ get. aren’t supposed to be two, but there you have it. Either give the people what they want, or they will schizz, I guess. Not me. I eat what is placed before me, giving thanks.

For what? It’s like the libral cant about ‘choice’ – to do . . . what? Finish the sentence. Remember that when the time comes for the reemergence of The Holy Mass, by God’s grace and Providence. I’ll get back to you, then, and see if you’re still humming the same tune about ‘attachments’. We’ll see just what you’re attached to, then. ‘Channngge’ is hard, they say. Not for me, Mark. Honestly. I like to keep the fluidity of the warrior. (don’t know if you’ve read Castenada)

Lot a bunk. Read parts of two of his ‘tomes’ if I recall, some years ago. Utter waste of time. Typ. trendy garbage, keeping you from reading real books, by real authors. It doesn’t matter to me one way or the other

Obv. it does – and very much so. Be honest. but I will not sit idly by while you stir up dissent.

Callin me CTA agin, aren’t you? I was pointing out, that _you_ are much more on the CTA bandwagon that I could ever be. You defend the ‘new order’. I encourage Catholics to go Mass. Big difference. I have been to a Tridentine Mass. It is beautiful in its own way, and I recommend the experience to anyone. But the Novus Ordo is also beautiful,

It’s crass. It’s cheap. It’s a fraud. and there are good, solid reasons to prefer it.

Only for the heterodox. The most obvious reason is that it’s in the vernacular.

The old GIRM explained why you DON’T want the worldwide liturgy in some vernacular tongue. That’s what ‘facing pages’ are for, rather – not something the priest should be saying. Big difference. That means I can just close my eyes and follow along, naturally, without having to divide my concentration between praying and struggling to follow along,

Be honest. No one can follow a ‘new order’, not when it changes from week to week, from stage play to stage play, from ad hoc to ad hoc, and so on. translating, or following the translation. Just like the Early Church did, or just as if Latin was my mother tongue (if the Mass was in Latin).

It’s a phony complaint, and you have to realize it. Remember – whoever else might read something on UseNet – you know you’re writing to me. And you have not been readin at all if you think you can kid me with this kind of stuff. And yes, there are differences between the rites, and there are also similarities. But everything that makes the Mass the Mass is common to both.

Very little, about as much as Cranmer kept that suited _him_. Same for Bugnini, Thurian and whatever ‘liturgical experts’ since. You keep your ’super-experts’. I’ll stick with Catholicism. Regardless of your judgment about faulty translations. The question was answered in the GIRM

If you mean the dishonest doubletalk about ‘for all’ in the present GIRM – it answers nothing by avoiding the question. Just . . be honest. Try – to be honest. It’ll be better for you. All you get by sticking your head in the sand is an earful of misery. brought up again. Just because you didn’t like their answer

There was no answer. Read it again. And read my various criticisms of those passages on Deja again. don’t have to attend the Novus Ordo if you don’t like it, but then, you are depriving yourself of Daily Mass, to point out one glaring obvious lack. And it is you doing the depriving of yourself, no one else.

But I do want to go to Mass. So I do. It’s important. But it’s not important to you. You merely want to show up at some liturgy, some ‘get together’, some ‘beingness in communitiness in the lovingness of otherness and goddess within us’, or whatever the trendy local parish cant happens to be. You … read more »

Response:

Thank you Stephnie. I do know that — Mark and I went over and over this very discussion several months ago. Mark has the particular arrogance of thinking he’s more Catholic than the Pope.

Not me. I think Paul VI was wrong. I’ve said why, very specifically, and very consistently. I answer him is, as I stated, for the benefit of others.

For others to judge, as they say. Peace.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If I read you correctly here, you mean to say that the Church didn’t promulgate the Novus Ordo. Oh, Pope Paul VI did. But he did so against the very GIRM, against Trent, not in like manner as he falsely claimed, against the advice of Ottaviani in his official capacity, and Bacci, et al, against all good reason and orthodox faith, and he was a ‘reformer’. That he later lamented the ’smoke of Satan’ is one thing. And everyone has pointed that out. But it must be remembered that he was the one who let it in. And people are sometimes reluctant to remember something so obv. The Church, we agree, would never promulgate an "unholy substitute liturgy." You want to make the case that Pope Paul VI did independently of the Church. He did so as Pope, on his own authority – on his own – against good advice, against all common sense, against holy tradition, against the proscriptions of the docs of Vat II, against established practice for liturgical revision, against rejections of the very liturgy ultimately promulgated, and that and other criticism found in the short critical study signed by Ottaviani and Bacci, etc. He did this – on his own. Popes have done things – on their own. Sometimes, they recanted, very late in life. Sometimes history has shown they just – were wrong – period. Paul VI clearly overstepped. And the results are plain. Yes – we have the Mass. But I don’t think you do. The Catholic Reformed have _their_ liturgy, just as do the Anglicans. And it will be up to future Popes and bishops to declare just how much like the Anglican/Episcopal it is, and how much like the Mass it copies. But short of that official declaration, Catholics must act on what they know now, in good conscience, based on the evidence and prior Church teaching – http://www.geocities.com/~ymjcath/MassNote.htm . The Pope is the visible head of the Church. And Catholicism may be roughly defined as those individuals in communion with the Pope. The Pope is not impeccable. Do you really wish marginalize all the CTA types, with whom you now find yourself in political alliance, who criticize this Pope, or used to, at every opportunity? Who remains in your ‘church’, then – besides yourself?

Coincidentally(?) I have just now encountered the CTA (call-to-action) for the very first time. I was looking at the message boards at CIN and someone referenced it. Guess what? I do not agree with them. social activism is fine, and necessary, but — women priests? Come on, Mark, I would hope you knew me better than that. But I don’t suppose you do, or care to. You just want to pigeonhole me as a liberal, a reformer or (shudder) a "libral". The fact is, I am none of the above. If you bothered to pay any attention, you would realize that our viewpoints are not very much different. It’s just that I adhere to Church authority in matters of the liturgy, and you have your particular axe to grind — so I guess I get chopped with that, and thrown on to the pile with liberals, Adoremians, and anyone else who refuses to swallow the authority of Pope Mark Johnson. By the way — *you* are in "my" Church, along with Mother Angelica, Ted Seeber, and, well, you know — Catholics. Heck, the Pope is even in *my* Church — do you acknowledge the same about him? I think you believe ‘God’ – whatever you think that is – only started such communication after 1965. True?

False. And guess "what" I think God is??? Hint: It only looks like bread. Pope John XXIII stated that God the Holy Spirit moved him to call the Council. "Reconvene the Vatican Council? We are infallible enough." I’ll have to check on who is supposed to have said that.

Yes, do, but I think it was someone who thought, erroneously, as you appraently do, that Vatican II was for the purpose of "finishing up" Vatican I. From what I learned of the history of it, they initially tried to come up with some documents and have the Pope sign them, and the Pope said, "no, you don’t get it — think a lot bigger than that!" — to that effect. You fail to recognize that it is God Himself Who is still guiding His Church. Believe it. But you don’t appreciate what that means – or what it will mean for the causes and practices you currently defend.

What you fail to recognize, or acknowledge, about me, is that I am fine with *whatever* the Church does. I will remain faithful, please God. The only reason I defend the Novus Ordo is that it is the official Mass of the Latin Rite. Period. If the Church decreed tomorrow that we were to go back to the Tridentine, I would start studying Latin so as to be better able to understand. my question, which you must avoid answering at all costs, because you and I both know the answer — and you know it shoots down your argument, below: Do I receive the Body and Blood of Christ when I communicate at the Novus Ordo? It IS The Magisterium which holds against ‘new order’. It appears invalid on its face. For this reason – FOR ALL – is NOT used! Read that again. Our Lord died for all, but not all are saved. How much clearer can that be?

yes, have read that. Now answer my question: When I take Communion at the Novus Ordo Missae, is there ANYTHING of bread in what I am taking, save the appearance? Or is it the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of my Savior? Come on — we both know that you know the answer — you admitted it to me previously. Just reiterate, for the sake of our audience. If you don’t admit what you believe, I will tell them. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Yes, I am different. I am constantly growing. But point out to me how these differences indicate a "dead end." …? No – what I said was that your defense of ‘new order’ is a dead end. If you don’t see it, yet, at some point, you’re gonna hit the wall. It’s inevitable. Rather – repent! convert! Give up your Reformed Catholic ways. Yes, in some ways they beat the popular PC heathenism of our times. But that’s still not good enough. Staying an Episcopalean, or Reformed Catholic, when we’re talking here on a Catholic ng, is not the end of the journey. There will be many pastors and bishops who say – stay the course – fight against Catholicism and orthodoxy. But many pastors and bishops said similar things in the past. Heresies have always been with The Church, entire regions were threatened, in every historical period – read about it even in the NT letters. But churchmen are often wrong, and particularly when they embrace a ‘better way’, as is the thing, today. Don’t listen to them. If you argue against myself, or anyone, based on Denzinger’s, or Ott, or The Roman Catechism, or the Summa, and similar and much else, fine. _I_ could be wrong on many things. But you have to come at it from an orthodox perspective, or you can never appreciate what’s Catholic, and what’s not. Otherwise you’ll be just another ‘trendy theologian’, as it were – and just as useless.

When I am a theologian — at all — then we’ll discuss how good or bad of a job I am doing. For now, I am just a lay person. But based on what you write, on suggestions of papal impeccability and some overarching cult of personality, etc. All defenders of ‘new order’ seem to wind up in that heresy, eventually – the Pope can do no wrong, therefore ‘new order’ is right – end of discussion. I was acknowledging the Pope’s wisdom in allowing the Tridentine to continue, not in promulgating the Novus Ordo. This Pope didn’t do that, but he *does* use it — as any good Catholic priest should. Or should not, you mean.

Please don’t try to tell me what I mean. That is what you might think, but, you know, we disagree. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -And neither should he. But he may be too well ‘past it’, by this time, for it to matter, in his case. Again – I . . . don’t know. I don’t know why he does what he does, or fails to. Let me be clear on that. But he should have put a stop to ‘new order’ when he had the chance, gradually if you prefer – but he should have acted. Now it’ll be up to his successor, or to one after that. And he won’t be remembered well, I think, as Pope. And it’s his own fault for embracing as much of ‘reform’ as he appeared to do. Downfall for any pontiff to turn away from orthodox Catholicism and try to graft on some ‘better way’. Revelation was right the first time. It can’t be improved upon. You’d think any Pope would know that, and not even give the hint of a suggestion otherwise. But ‘new order’ stands or falls on its own right, and in comparison with the actual Mass it was _intended_ to replace – remember that? ‘New order’ wasn’t supposed to be some ‘parallel rite’, as is becoming the talk today (say Fr. Mole in the latest LM, who is dead wrong I think). It was supposed to be literally the Roman Rite, not Roman Rite 2, but . . The Roman Rite. Which is exactly what it is — the official Latin Rite. All the stamps. All the approvals. NOT a ‘parallel rite’. NOT intended to be a ‘parallel rite’. Meant to utterly displace and replace The Latin Mass – entirely, completely. There is only one Mass of The Church of The Latin Rite. We just disagree on which one ’tis.

Actually, because of the obstinate attachments — well I don’t know, maybe it’s just nostalgia — of certain people, there are two. There aren’t supposed to be two, but there you have it. Either give the people what they want, or they will schizz, I guess. Not me. I eat what is placed before me, giving thanks. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -reason the Tridentine is still around is because

Response:

Joseph, if you didn’t know, arguing with Mark Johnson = ramming your head against a brick wall

You must get tired of trying to run everyone else’s life for them. This is what – the 100th time or whatever that you’ve gone out of your way to tell someone not to talk to me on UseNet? You hate me that much, do you – you ‘Catholic’ you? You selfish hypocrite you. Peace. One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot discern truth from lies. Another is when they don’t even bother to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear. [Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I thought the Latin Liturgy was prohibited after Vatican II. Is the Latin Liturgy "recognized" by the Church? It’s still The Mass of The Church of The Latin Rite. The ‘new order’, the unholy substitute liturgy is what is problematic. The Mass is the Mass is the Mass. The Catholic Church does not promulgate "unholy substitute liturgies" The Church doesn’t. Joseph, if you didn’t know, arguing with Mark Johnson = ramming your head against a brick wall over and over and over and over. As far as he’s concerned, every Catholic in the world is wrong except for himself, which most people would call paranoia but he considers enlightenment. Mark, you’re in my killfile, so don’t bother responding to me.

Thank you Stephnie. I do know that — Mark and I went over and over this very discussion several months ago. Mark has the particular arrogance of thinking he’s more Catholic than the Pope. But the reason I answer him is, as I stated, for the benefit of others.

Response:

If I read you correctly here, you mean to say that the Church didn’t promulgate the Novus Ordo.

Oh, Pope Paul VI did. But he did so against the very GIRM, against Trent, not in like manner as he falsely claimed, against the advice of Ottaviani in his official capacity, and Bacci, et al, against all good reason and orthodox faith, and he was a ‘reformer’. That he later lamented the ’smoke of Satan’ is one thing. And everyone has pointed that out. But it must be remembered that he was the one who let it in. And people are sometimes reluctant to remember something so obv. The Church, we agree, would never promulgate an "unholy substitute liturgy." You want to make the case that Pope Paul VI did independently of the Church.

He did so as Pope, on his own authority – on his own – against good advice, against all common sense, against holy tradition, against the proscriptions of the docs of Vat II, against established practice for liturgical revision, against rejections of the very liturgy ultimately promulgated, and that and other criticism found in the short critical study signed by Ottaviani and Bacci, etc. He did this – on his own. Popes have done things – on their own. Sometimes, they recanted, very late in life. Sometimes history has shown they just – were wrong – period. Paul VI clearly overstepped. And the results are plain. Yes – we have the Mass. But I don’t think you do. The Catholic Reformed have _their_ liturgy, just as do the Anglicans. And it will be up to future Popes and bishops to declare just how much like the Anglican/Episcopal it is, and how much like the Mass it copies. But short of that official declaration, Catholics must act on what they know now, in good conscience, based on the evidence and prior Church teaching – http://www.geocities.com/~ymjcath/MassNote.htm . The Pope is the visible head of the Church. And Catholicism may be roughly defined as those individuals in communion with the Pope.

The Pope is not impeccable. Do you really wish marginalize all the CTA types, with whom you now find yourself in political alliance, who criticize this Pope, or used to, at every opportunity? Who remains in your ‘church’, then – besides yourself? So to separate the "Church" from the Pope, as you do, is to create a false dichotomy.

Popes can be wrong. He heads The Church. He can be wrong. Popes headed The Church in the past. And we have no reason – repeat, no reason – to believe they were wrong about The Mass – then. We have no reason to doubt The Roman Catechism. They had no reason to doubt the Summa. And so on. Either they were right, then, or they are – now. But there’s a clear contradiction. It suggests that the two PC Popes (post-conciliar), have been fundamentally wrong in both promulgating and maintaining the ‘new order’, the so-called revised Roman Rite – meant to utterly replace the Mass (sorry Fr. Mole, but true). If it ever comes to the point that ICELism gives way to an honest translation of the consecration – then we’re back to the Intervention and the early complaints with the ’standard mass’. But we’re not even at that point. He was wrong. He overstepped. He had the raw authority, but he still misused it. He did not do as The Church wished. He was at that time, the Vicar of Christ. He did not need *anyone’s* approval. That’s what you don’t seem to get. The Church is not a democracy, nor is it anything like a democracy.

It’s not a tyranny neither. You don’t understand. There are rules. There’s a standard. There are such things as illegal orders. And there’s no virtue, before God, in following such. As an example of this — the prefect for the Congreagation of the Doctrine of the Faith is, according to his rank in the Church, a bishop. He does not "outrank" his fellow bishops, nor is he "second in command" in the Church. Sacred Congregations, to the Pope, are like cabinet members to a president. They help him to carry out his functions, but they have no authority other than what the Pope entrusts to them. And the Pope, as sovereign, could dissolve any of these at any time he so chose.

You’re complaining about administrative shake-ups and changes. I’m talking about standards, or even just about the very proscriptions of the docs of Vat II with regard to a proposed revision of The Mass. ‘reformers’ always leave out of your careful calculations – God, Himself. The supernatural. Justice. No, Mark. It is you who ignore God.

But I go to Mass. I don’t ignore God. I think you do. You have a strange notion that God stopped communicating with His Church some time in the 60’s.

Never said such. And there are people trying to serve God, even today, in a ruined, desacralized institutional church – the worst it’s ever been. But I believe there are still Saints, nonetheless. I think you believe ‘God’ – whatever you think that is – only started such communication after 1965. True? Pope John XXIII stated that God the Holy Spirit moved him to call the Council.

"Reconvene the Vatican Council? We are infallible enough." I’ll have to check on who is supposed to have said that. God does not abandon His Church.

Churchmen abandon God. That’s how it works. Same for the Pharisees. Same for the chosen people, not once, but numerous times. Same for heretics and Reformed Catholics. True? You fail to recognize that it is God Himself Who is still guiding His Church.

Believe it. But you don’t appreciate what that means – or what it will mean for the causes and practices you currently defend. The frustration comes from dealing with the likes of you, Mark — plain and simple. Then your frustration is with Trent, and Aquinas, Gamber and von Hildebrand, with Scripture itself – but NOT with Bugnini, or Thurian, or the like. Don’t be frustrated. Repent! Convert! Trent and Aquinas I recognize. Scripture I recognize. Those other names have no authority that I am aware of.

Unfortunately for Catholics, Bugnini and Thurian and assorted others – DID – have legitimate authority. They, like Paul VI, simply misused that authority, and did wrong. It needs to be set right at some point – and not by some compromise that allows for ‘parallel rites’ in perpetuity. Only one rite is guaranteed for perpetuity. And it’s presently found in the catacombs. But you’ll see it more prominently, again. From the Mass, I get nothing but peace I’m sure the Anglicans say much the same – so too for the born agains who do so much good charitable work, and hang on to the latest CCM tune, and watch Pat Robertson religiously, as it were. so what?

So . . . they get ‘peace’, as well, after a fashion – just as you yourself describe. It’s not the peace that lasts. What, pray tell, would be lacking?

Catholicism. receive the Body and Blood of Christ when I communicate at the Novus Ordo?

It IS The Magisterium which holds against ‘new order’. It appears invalid on its face. For this reason – FOR ALL – is NOT used! Read that again. Our Lord died for all, but not all are saved. How much clearer can that be? Yes, I am different. I am constantly growing. But point out to me how these differences indicate a "dead end." …?

No – what I said was that your defense of ‘new order’ is a dead end. If you don’t see it, yet, at some point, you’re gonna hit the wall. It’s inevitable. Rather – repent! convert! Give up your Reformed Catholic ways. Yes, in some ways they beat the popular PC heathenism of our times. But that’s still not good enough. Staying an Episcopalean, or Reformed Catholic, when we’re talking here on a Catholic ng, is not the end of the journey. There will be many pastors and bishops who say – stay the course – fight against Catholicism and orthodoxy. But many pastors and bishops said similar things in the past. Heresies have always been with The Church, entire regions were threatened, in every historical period – read about it even in the NT letters. But churchmen are often wrong, and particularly when they embrace a ‘better way’, as is the thing, today. Don’t listen to them. If you argue against myself, or anyone, based on Denzinger’s, or Ott, or The Roman Catechism, or the Summa, and similar and much else, fine. _I_ could be wrong on many things. But you have to come at it from an orthodox perspective, or you can never appreciate what’s Catholic, and what’s not. Otherwise you’ll be just another ‘trendy theologian’, as it were – and just as useless. But based on what you write, on suggestions of papal impeccability and some overarching cult of personality, etc. All defenders of ‘new order’ seem to wind up in that heresy, eventually – the Pope can do no wrong, therefore ‘new order’ is right – end of discussion. I was acknowledging the Pope’s wisdom in allowing the Tridentine to continue, not in promulgating the Novus Ordo. This Pope didn’t do that, but he *does* use it — as any good Catholic priest should.

Or should not, you mean. And neither should he. But he may be too well ‘past it’, by this time, for it to matter, in his case. Again – I . . . don’t know. I don’t know why he does what he does, or fails to. Let me be clear on that. But he should have put a stop to ‘new order’ when he had the chance, gradually if you prefer – but he should have acted. Now it’ll be up to his successor, or to one after that. And he won’t be remembered well, I think, as Pope. And it’s his own fault for embracing as much of ‘reform’ as he appeared to do. Downfall for any pontiff to turn away from orthodox Catholicism and try to graft on some ‘better way’. Revelation was … read more »

Response:

Joseph, if you didn’t know, arguing with Mark Johnson = ramming your head against a brick wall over and over and over and over. As far as he’s concerned, every Catholic in the world is wrong except for himself, which most people would call paranoia but he considers enlightenment. Mark, you’re in my killfile, so don’t bother responding to me.

Response:

If I read you correctly here, you mean to say that the Church didn’t promulgate the Novus Ordo. The Church, we agree, would never promulgate an "unholy substitute liturgy." You want to make the case that Pope Paul VI did.

independently of the Church. The Pope is the visible head of the Church. And Catholicism may be roughly defined as those individuals in communion with the Pope. So to separate the "Church" from the Pope, as you do, is to create a false dichotomy. He was wrong. He overstepped. He had the raw authority, but he still misused it. He did not do as The Church wished.

He was at that time, the Vicar of Christ. He did not need *anyone’s* approval. That’s what you don’t seem to get. The Church is not a democracy, nor is it anything like a democracy. As an example of this — the prefect for the Congreagation of the Doctrine of the Faith is, according to his rank in the Church, a bishop. He does not "outrank" his fellow bishops, nor is he "second in command" in the Church. Sacred Congregations, to the Pope, are like cabinet members to a president. They help him to carry out his functions, but they have no authority other than what the Pope entrusts to them. And the Pope, as sovereign, could dissolve any of these at any time he so chose. You silly ‘reformers’ always leave out of your careful calculations – God, Himself. The supernatural. Justice.

No, Mark. It is you who ignore God. You have a strange notion that God stopped communicating with His Church some time in the 60’s. Pope John XXIII stated that God the Holy Spirit moved him to call the Council. God does not abandon His Church. You fail to recognize that it is God Himself Who is still guiding His Church. I am not attempting to reform anything. I believe the Church is still the Church, and the Mass is still the Mass, and the Pope is still the Pope. And God is still God. A ‘new mass’ is not necessarily one even valid, by form or intention. This has really yet to be systematically defended, apart from simply asserting that the Pope can do no wrong in these matters – that he’s not impeccable, but of course . . . he is (which he’s not) – which is ultimately where every defender of the ‘new order’ liturgy ends up; frustrated and almost insane. The frustration comes from dealing with the likes of you, Mark — plain and simple. Then your frustration is with Trent, and Aquinas, Gamber and von Hildebrand, with Scripture itself – but NOT with Bugnini, or Thurian, or the like. Don’t be frustrated. Repent! Convert!

Trent and Aquinas I recognize. Scripture I recognize. Those other names have no authority that I am aware of. From the Mass, I get nothing but peace I’m sure the Anglicans say much the same – so too for the born agains who do so much good charitable work, and hang on to the latest CCM tune, and watch Pat Robertson religiously, as it were.

so what? It’s not the peace that lasts.

What, pray tell, would be lacking? I want to hear you say it — do I receive the Body and Blood of Christ when I communicate at the Novus Ordo? You shouldn’t prefer this new liturgy, as I suspect you do. It’s not only a dead end. It’s a deadly dead end, as we see over the years just on UseNet. Where do you find *any* Mass offered on Usenet? It’s a dead end for defenders such as yourself. I mean . . . look at you. And look how you started out on UseNet. Very different.

Yes, I am different. I am constantly growing. But point out to me how these differences indicate a "dead end." …? I don’t think you know what you’re talking about, but if you have something to say, about me, back it up. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Is the Eucharist offered during the Latin Liturgy? yes. Apparently, the custom used to be it was not during certain High Masses. That may be the basis of the question. What is the current Pope’s position, officially or implicitly, on the Latin Liturgy? No one really knows. The current Pope’s position, explicitly declared and stated by him, is to provide for the Tridentine Rite, as a concession to those who are attached to it. It is, obviously, still the Mass, and given the two alternatives of allowing the Tridentine Rite to continue, thus keeping the likes of Mark Johnson in the Catholic Church, or disallowing it and letting them all schism away into some kind of "Roman Orthodox" Church, I see the wisdom in the Holy Father’s decision. I am glad Mark is still in the same Church as I am, even though he will not acknowledge that about me. But based on what you write, on suggestions of papal impeccability and some overarching cult of personality, etc. All defenders of ‘new order’ seem to wind up in that heresy, eventually – the Pope can do no wrong, therefore ‘new order’ is right – end of discussion.

I was acknowledging the Pope’s wisdom in allowing the Tridentine to continue, not in promulgating the Novus Ordo. This Pope didn’t do that, but he *does* use it — as any good Catholic priest should. But ‘new order’ stands or falls on its own right, and in comparison with the actual Mass it was _intended_ to replace – remember that? ‘New order’ wasn’t supposed to be some ‘parallel rite’, as is becoming the talk today (say Fr. Mole in the latest LM, who is dead wrong I think). It was supposed to be literally the Roman Rite, not Roman Rite 2, but . . The Roman Rite.

Which is exactly what it is — the official Latin Rite. The only reason the Tridentine is still around is because of the attachments of certain people. Of course The Latin Mass, the actual Catholic Mass of the Roman Rite had to be suppressed.

The Novus Ordo is the actual Catholic Mass of the Latin Rite. The former rite is still valid, of course, but not to be preferred. The fact that you can attend the Tridentine if you want to makes it obvious it hasn’t been suppressed. I really don’t want to discuss this any further with you, Mark. I have no desire whatsoever to beat my head against that particular wall. I will continue to point out to others the falsity of your "unholy substitute liturgy" position, whenever I see you bringing it up. Just so you know.

Response:

I thought the Latin Liturgy was prohibited after Vatican II. Is the Latin Liturgy "recognized" by the Church? It’s still The Mass of The Church of The Latin Rite. The ‘new order’, the unholy substitute liturgy is what is problematic. The Mass is the Mass is the Mass. The Catholic Church does not promulgate "unholy substitute liturgies"

The Church doesn’t. Pope Paul VI did. He was wrong. He overstepped. He had the raw authority, but he still misused it. He did not do as The Church wished. He ignored the very GIRM in the missal in use then. He ignored the docs of Vat II. He ignored much else to falsely promulgate this neo-Prot thing, as Ottaviani, Bacci, et al rightly characterized it. Johnson has a problem with it, so it’s problematic, to him. But not to faithful Catholics.

It IS The Magisterium which holds against ‘new order’. Our Lord died for all, but not all are saved. People may someday be nostalgic for ‘new order’, when it is suppressed. wishful thinking

Of course that’s my wish. But it’s not wishful thinking. You silly ‘reformers’ always leave out of your careful calculations – God, Himself. The supernatural. Justice. A ‘new mass’ is not necessarily one even valid, by form or intention. This has really yet to be systematically defended, apart from simply asserting that the Pope can do no wrong in these matters – that he’s not impeccable, but of course . . . he is (which he’s not) – which is ultimately where every defender of the ‘new order’ liturgy ends up; frustrated and almost insane. The frustration comes from dealing with the likes of you, Mark — plain and simple.

Then your frustration is with Trent, and Aquinas, Gamber and von Hildebrand, with Scripture itself – but NOT with Bugnini, or Thurian, or the like. Don’t be frustrated. Repent! Convert! From the Mass, I get nothing but peace

I’m sure the Anglicans say much the same – so too for the born agains who do so much good charitable work, and hang on to the latest CCM tune, and watch Pat Robertson religiously, as it were. It’s not the peace that lasts. You shouldn’t prefer this new liturgy, as I suspect you do. It’s not only a dead end. It’s a deadly dead end, as we see over the years just on UseNet. Where do you find *any* Mass offered on Usenet?

It’s a dead end for defenders such as yourself. I mean . . . look at you. And look how you started out on UseNet. Very different. Is the Eucharist offered during the Latin Liturgy? yes.

Apparently, the custom used to be it was not during certain High Masses. That may be the basis of the question. What is the current Pope’s position, officially or implicitly, on the Latin Liturgy? No one really knows. The current Pope’s position, explicitly declared and stated by him, is to provide for the Tridentine Rite, as a concession to those who are attached to it. It is, obviously, still the Mass, and given the two alternatives of allowing the Tridentine Rite to continue, thus keeping the likes of Mark Johnson in the Catholic Church, or disallowing it and letting them all schism away into some kind of "Roman Orthodox" Church, I see the wisdom in the Holy Father’s decision. I am glad Mark is still in the same Church as I am, even though he will not acknowledge that about me.

But based on what you write, on suggestions of papal impeccability and some overarching cult of personality, etc. All defenders of ‘new order’ seem to wind up in that heresy, eventually – the Pope can do no wrong, therefore ‘new order’ is right – end of discussion. But ‘new order’ stands or falls on its own right, and in comparison with the actual Mass it was _intended_ to replace – remember that? ‘New order’ wasn’t supposed to be some ‘parallel rite’, as is becoming the talk today (say Fr. Mole in the latest LM, who is dead wrong I think). It was supposed to be literally the Roman Rite, not Roman Rite 2, but . . The Roman Rite. Of course The Latin Mass, the actual Catholic Mass of the Roman Rite had to be suppressed. This wasn’t a variation, but was supposed to be the thing, itself. But ‘new order’ obv. was a fraud, from Bugnini on up, and right to the present day’s ad ‘hockery’ and ‘liturgies’ you can’t even follow because they change from week to week – talk about ‘participation’ ! It more than anything has led to the ruination of the institutional church for which JP II _should_ apologize, for his inaction in not suppressing ‘new order’ which has contributed significantly to the ‘problems in The Church’, as some phrase it. I suggest this even while I tend to believe those who believe the Pope is NOT responsible, not all there, not coherent, verging on senility if not already there, and so on – that what he signs are what people bring him who manage to break through whatever cordon of keepers. If a conservative brings him a doc, he signs, and chastises abuse of ‘EM’s, without criticizing ‘EM’s, that is – which Vat II never called for. If a libral comes along, he signs that, and sends mixed messages. He kisses the Koran, and may not even realized what he was doing at the time – we just don’t know. So I suggest he apologize, for his sin of omission and failure to lead as an actual Pope, allowing that he may not be competent personally at this point, only because he has apologized for a host of things either that The Church needn’t have apologized for or for which he had nothing to do himself. So this would be like that, but really, unlike so much of the rest – needs to be said. That may be the one, principal reason why he’ll remain silent? Interesting times. Peace. One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot discern truth from lies. Another is when they don’t even bother to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear. [Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]

Response:

The Mass is the Mass is the Mass. The Catholic Church does not promulgate "unholy substitute liturgies" in place of the Mass. Mark Johnson has a problem with it, so it’s problematic, to him. But not to faithful Catholics. Does it "count" as a real mass or is it just a form of nostalgia, if you’ll pardon the phrase?

It "counts" as a real Mass. People may someday be nostalgic for ‘new order’, when it is suppressed.

wishful thinking A ‘new mass’ is not necessarily one even valid, by form or intention. This has really yet to be systematically defended, apart from simply asserting that the Pope can do no wrong in these matters – that he’s not impeccable, but of course . . . he is (which he’s not) – which is ultimately where every defender of the ‘new order’ liturgy ends up; frustrated and almost insane.

The frustration comes from dealing with the likes of you, Mark — plain and simple. From the Mass, I get nothing but peace — and the conviction of my own sins, which, via the Mass, and Confession, get taken away. You shouldn’t prefer this new liturgy, as I suspect you do. It’s not only a dead end. It’s a deadly dead end, as we see over the years just on UseNet.

Where do you find *any* Mass offered on Usenet? Is the Eucharist offered during the Latin Liturgy?

yes. What is the current Pope’s position, officially or implicitly, on the Latin Liturgy? No one really knows.

That is a crock! The current Pope’s position, explicitly declared and stated by him, is to provide for the Tridentine Rite, as a concession to those who are attached to it. It is, obviously, still the Mass, and given the two alternatives of allowing the Tridentine Rite to continue, thus keeping the likes of Mark Johnson in the Catholic Church, or disallowing it and letting them all schism away into some kind of "Roman Orthodox" Church, I see the wisdom in the Holy Father’s decision. I am glad Mark is still in the same Church as I am, even though he will not acknowledge that about me.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In other matters, are the official documents of the Catholic Church still written in Latin; that is, is Latin still the official language of the CC? Are there any web sites devoted to current Catholic doctrines and issues written in Latin? I do believe that Latin is one of the official languages of the nation of Vatican City, so that is the reason that proclomations made by the church are in Latin. And since the rule is that Masses are to be said in the language of the country in which one is residing, one could safely assume that Masses said in Vatican City are said in Latin. I have sung in the choir for Masses that had the service music(the Gloria, the Agnus Dei, etc) in Latin, but the rest of the Mass was in English. These are usually the Masses of high holidays, i.e., Christmas and Easter. Buny

Actually, I think Italian is more often used in Vatican City. As far as I know, no one in the world speaks Latin as a first language — it is a "dead" language; and most of the inhabitants of Vatican City speak Italian.

Response:

In other matters, are the official documents of the Catholic Church still written in Latin; that is, is Latin still the official language of the CC? Are there any web sites devoted to current Catholic doctrines and issues written in Latin?

I do believe that Latin is one of the official languages of the nation of Vatican City, so that is the reason that proclomations made by the church are in Latin. And since the rule is that Masses are to be said in the language of the country in which one is residing, one could safely assume that Masses said in Vatican City are said in Latin. I have sung in the choir for Masses that had the service music(the Gloria, the Agnus Dei, etc) in Latin, but the rest of the Mass was in English. These are usually the Masses of high holidays, i.e., Christmas and Easter. Buny

Response:

It’s still The Mass of The Church of The Latin Rite. The ‘new order’, the unholy substitute liturgy is what is problematic. Does it "count" as a real mass or is it just a form of nostalgia, if you’ll pardon the phrase?

People may someday be nostalgic for ‘new order’, when it is suppressed. I issued the offer to various on even these ngs to please get back to me when _that_ is what’s getting . . . ‘changed’ (change being difficult, etc, etc). But while nostalgia is always present in anything worthwhile, there is also trust, and faith, and esteem for what was right from the start. It’s not nostalgia to prefer a well made suit to a cheap one. It’s not nostalgia to prefer good tv shows to junk. It’s not nostalgia to say they don’t make em like they used to. In a lot of cases, in order to fight the rampant inflation of the last half century (a car that cost $3000 in 1965, a similar model would cost maybe $20,000 today – a house at $30K, now at $600K – and so on), manufacturers HAVE cut back on quality, and reliability. A ‘new mass’ is not necessarily one even valid, by form or intention. This has really yet to be systematically defended, apart from simply asserting that the Pope can do no wrong in these matters – that he’s not impeccable, but of course . . . he is (which he’s not) – which is ultimately where every defender of the ‘new order’ liturgy ends up; frustrated and almost insane. You shouldn’t prefer this new liturgy, as I suspect you do. It’s not only a dead end. It’s a deadly dead end, as we see over the years just on UseNet. Is the Eucharist offered during the Latin Liturgy?

That’s an odd question. What is the current Pope’s position, officially or implicitly, on the Latin Liturgy?

No one really knows. But then the problem may be that this Pope either does not know his own mind, or is feeble and being held captive in some way by those of various factions. That is, he’s a figurehead, or rubberstamp, for whoever manages to get through the door. If it’s an orthodox Catholic, then we get orthodox decrees. If ‘reformer’, we get more ‘changing church’ stuff. From what I’ve read, this Pope appears to have been fairly heterodox from the start, and that might explain his election as Pope, rather than a dreaded ‘conservative’ – and such has been the dread, apparently, since the election of Paul VI. When the Latin Liturgy was performed before V II, I know the priest kept his back to the congregation for the most part. But could the parishioners hear what the priest was saying, or was it largely muttered?

You don’t know that the priest "kept his back to". He was facing the altar, to be more precise. At times, the rubrics call for him to turn and face the faithful. At times he is to raise his voice. At times he makes the Sign of the Cross, or even repeatedly. These actions are like markers that tell the faithful where the priest is at some point in, say, the Canon. In other matters, are the official documents of the Catholic Church still written in Latin; that is, is Latin still the official language of the CC? Are there any web sites devoted to current Catholic doctrines and issues written in Latin?

If you want ‘current’ doctrines, why the interest in Latin, at all? ‘Current’ doctrine is hardly that. It either is Catholic teaching, or not – and its ‘currency’ has nothing to do with it. Catholic teaching is not of the moment. It is not temporized. I don’t know if that’s what you were getting at. If so, is there an online dictionary of current terms translated into Latin. ( I know there must be a latin word for "computer" out there somewhere .)

The Church Latin is a dead language. It is a liturgical language. It is meant to be that way – unchanging. Latin, as you know, is used for technical terms, particularly in biology and medicine (as is Greek). But it is no longer a vernacular language. Now, I am not Catholic (I’m Episcopalian), but I have always **loved** the idea that you could go anywhere in the world and experience the same liturgy. It seems to engender a **real** sense of universality. I must say that a service in the vernacular simply can not do this.

Obviously. And more to the point, the General Instruction to the Roman Missal, prior to Vatican II, made _precisely_ this point. Paul VI had to have read that very missal, and that GIRM. Yet he promulgated an entirely vernacular rite. Idiocy? Bitter heterodox obstinancy? The ‘best of intentions’ based on delusion and rationalization? Who knows? I think the latin language is beautiful and have read (WF Buckley, for instance) as well as heard from others that the Latin Liturgy was positively sublime. Is there any real chance that in the future that the Latin Liturgy might be permitted as long as a church has one in the vernacular?

Why – "as long as"? Why must it be so? If the ‘new liturgy’ is problematic, why would you insist Catholics be forced to a problematic liturgy? The Latin Mass is available most everywhere, by the grace of God – if not that of churchmen, today – currently, speaking of that. You don’t seem as if you are particularly eager for more than ‘nostalgia’ or curiosity. I doubt the Holy Mass would mean much to you. ‘New order’ can be ‘workshopped’, and ‘crafted’, as people like. That’s what it’s designed for. And you might prefer that, or the Episcopalean service and the like, much more. If you are interested in this matter, please see: http://www.geocities.com/ymjcath/MassNote.htm http://www.geocities.com/ymjcath/The_Mass.htm http://www.geocities.com/ymjcath/CathLink , under Controversies http://www.geocities.com/ymjcath/Books.htm That’s why those pages are there. Peace. One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot discern truth from lies. Another is when they don’t even bother to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear. [Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]

Response:

You can hear a latin mass in any large city in the world. You have to look for it though. Special permission must be given for a church to say latin masses. However, this is commonly given.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was brushing up on my latin and decided to see what was on the net about it. I was surprised to see that there are still latin masses still performed. I have a few questions: I thought the Latin Liturgy was prohibited after Vatican II. Is the Latin Liturgy "recognized" by the Church? Does it "count" as a real mass or is it just a form of nostalgia, if you’ll pardon the phrase? Is the Eucharist offered during the Latin Liturgy? What is the current Pope’s position, officially or implicitly, on the Latin Liturgy? When the Latin Liturgy was performed before V II, I know the priest kept his back to the congregation for the most part. But could the parishioners hear what the priest was saying, or was it largely muttered? In other matters, are the official documents of the Catholic Church still written in Latin; that is, is Latin still the official language of the CC? Are there any web sites devoted to current Catholic doctrines and issues written in Latin? If so, is there an online dictionary of current terms translated into Latin. ( I know there must be a latin word for "computer" out there somewhere .) None of the sites I found talked about any of these issues. Now, I am not Catholic (I’m Episcopalian), but I have always **loved** the idea that you could go anywhere in the world and experience the same liturgy. It seems to engender a **real** sense of universality. I must say that a service in the vernacular simply can not do this. I think the latin language is beautiful and have read (WF Buckley, for instance) as well as heard from others that the Latin Liturgy was positively sublime. Is there any real chance that in the future that the Latin Liturgy might be permitted as long as a church has one in the vernacular? I would like to check one out one of these days. (I live in Queens, New York.)

Response:

I was brushing up on my Latin and decided to see what was on the net about it. I was surprised to see that there are still Latin masses still performed. I have a few questions: I thought the Latin Liturgy was prohibited after Vatican II. Is the Latin Liturgy "recognized" by the Church?

The vernacular is PREFERRED. No one outlawed Latin, though some Catholics would also mistakenly agree with your view, it is more a misunderstanding of Vatican II, than the truth. Does it "count" as a real mass or is it just a form of nostalgia, if you’ll pardon the phrase?

Attending a properly sanctioned Latin Mass fully and completely satisfies the faithful’s obligation to attend Mass on Sunday and Holy Days. Is the Eucharist offered during the Latin Liturgy?

Yes. All with full pre-vatican regalia, patens etc. What is the current Pope’s position, officially or implicitly, on the Latin Liturgy?

That it is useful, valuable, and not to be discouraged, those in the parish or deanery who are drawn to the Latin Mass are to be treated with respect and Love, they are not to be marginalized or in any way made to feel inferior to the vernacular Mass attendees. When the Latin Liturgy was performed before V II, I know the priest kept his back to the congregation for the most part. But could the parishioners hear what the priest was saying, or was it largely muttered?

Still muttered, can’t hear a thing. In other matters, are the official documents of the Catholic Church still written in Latin;

Yes, it is the official language of the Vatican. that is, is Latin still the official language of the CC?

I believe it is of the Vatican, of the Church is too broad a statement, it leaves out those Uniate Churches which are faithful sons and daughters of the Church who exercise their own non-Latin rites and yet are still in full union with the Holy Father, there are the Maronite, Byzantine, Coptic etc rites all in union with the Holy Father. Are there any web sites devoted to current Catholic doctrines and issues written in Latin?

I am sure you will find certain Catholics who will tell you that there has not been a legitimate pope since the death of Pope Pius XII. They are referred to as Sedevacantists, they are usually though not exclusively, the same crowd that thinks the current Latin Mass is not a legitimate form, since it deviates from certain norms they believe are essential. They believe that only they will be saved and that they are a remnant of the Church. It is when they start denouncing the Holy Father and the teaching authority of the bishops that things get out of hand. You can find one splinter group (of unknown numbers) who actually believe they’ve elected a new pope, Pius XIII!?!? If so, is there an online I think the Latin language is beautiful and have read (WF Buckley, for instance) as well as heard from others that the Latin Liturgy was positively sublime. Is there any real chance that in the future that the Latin Liturgy might be permitted as long as a church has one in the vernacular? I would like to check one out one of these days. (I live in Queens, New York.)

New York most certainly has a Latin Mass in many parishes, call the Archdiocese and ask. They should have a schedule. Of course they are a large bureaucracy, but being a native of New York, you shouldn’t have any trouble dealing with a bureaucracy.

Response:

I was brushing up on my latin and decided to see what was on the net about it. I was surprised to see that there are still latin masses still performed. I have a few questions: I thought the Latin Liturgy was prohibited after Vatican II. Is the Latin Liturgy "recognized" by the Church? Does it "count" as a real mass or is it just a form of nostalgia, if you’ll pardon the phrase? Is the Eucharist offered during the Latin Liturgy? What is the current Pope’s position, officially or implicitly, on the Latin Liturgy? When the Latin Liturgy was performed before V II, I know the priest kept his back to the congregation for the most part. But could the parishioners hear what the priest was saying, or was it largely muttered? In other matters, are the official documents of the Catholic Church still written in Latin; that is, is Latin still the official language of the CC? Are there any web sites devoted to current Catholic doctrines and issues written in Latin? If so, is there an online dictionary of current terms translated into Latin. ( I know there must be a latin word for "computer" out there somewhere .) None of the sites I found talked about any of these issues. Now, I am not Catholic (I’m Episcopalian), but I have always **loved** the idea that you could go anywhere in the world and experience the same liturgy. It seems to engender a **real** sense of universality. I must say that a service in the vernacular simply can not do this. I think the latin language is beautiful and have read (WF Buckley, for instance) as well as heard from others that the Latin Liturgy was positively sublime. Is there any real chance that in the future that the Latin Liturgy might be permitted as long as a church has one in the vernacular? I would like to check one out one of these days. (I live in Queens, New York.)

Response:

2000 Libertarian Vote freedom

admin — Thu, 05 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

VOTE LIBERTY VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE VOTE LIBERTARIAN Who needs faith in Washington Anyway? George Bush wants to leave your freedoms in the hands of the States and local municipalities. He still wants your money. Al Gore wants your freedom in Washington, and he wants even more of your money. Both make promises upon promises, promises you and I both know that will never be fulfilled. The old saying goes "If you want something done correctly, better start doing your homework and do it yourself." It is now time to stop breastfeeding from the government’s contaminated nipple and time to take responsibility for our own actions and become the great and free nation our Founding Founders originally intended. The Libertarian Party is the largest third party in the country, with over 1400 elected officials nationwide, and 205,029 registered voters with thousands more signing up by the day. As the only third party on the ballot in all 50 states and DC, with over $2.7 million raised by private individuals, we are also the only national party with an absolute ban on "soft money". Further, the Libertarian Party accepts contributions only from those able to vote. No corporations, foreign governments, foreign nationals, foreign military officials, multinational corporations are allowed to make any financial contribution to our campaigns or our party. No exceptions. Right now the Libertarian party is leading all other parties in several western states, so much so that the Republican Governor of Colorado Bill Owens publicly warned voters that the libertarian party "threatens our long-standing two party tradition." Imagine that, a governor scolding his fellow citizens for choosing to speak out on election day and vote for greater personal autonomy and libery, rather than continuing the trend of increasing governmental interference in their daily lives! It is however sadly predictable that either a Republican or Democrat would criticize voters’ choices which may in fact jeopardize their very job. While Democrats and Republicans continue to assail liberty of choice at the voting box, they carry on perhaps their most incidious fraud: Saving the Social Security Trust Fund. The so-called "lockbox" both Al Gore and George W. Bush continue to tout is, in fact, an item of fiction. It simply does not exist. If such a lock box did exist, what would be found inside is a series of government sponsored IOU’s. You see, Social Security has been raided for decades by both Democrats and Republicans seeking funding for projects which often serve no national interest but instead award huge contracts to large campaign contributors in a specific district. However, during each and every election cycle we hear the same promises repeated again and again. When a politician offers to "save" Social Security or any other entitlement program, what you are hearing is a pathetic plea for another chance to save a system from which they themselves have bilked trillions of dollars to sponsor more often than not corrupt or failed governmental programs. Quite simply its a case of the fox guarding the henhouse. Now I don’t know about you, but I believe it is time for a change. The only person who should be able to determine how you, the average citizen, invests your money, be it for retirement, education, charity or any other endeavor, should be you! When the greedy hand of government gets involved in the personal finance choices of the private citizen, then the Government inherently has a heavy hand in deciding how that money is spent. Even a small investment in a common savings account would yield earnings far greater than Social Security ever could, considering the fifteen percent or more currently taken from the wages of the average American worker. However, Social Security will forever be kept alive by Democrats and Republicans because it is a political program created for political purposes far removed from you, the American Citizen. After watching the debates, I can no longer allow myself to idly sit by while both Republicans and Democrats offer "solutions" to problems they themselves created. The "fixes" they offer merely chip further away at our ever eroding freedoms. It is often said that those who vote for neither a Republican or Democrat are "wasting their vote". Do not allow yourself to fall into the "wasted vote" lie. Wasting your vote means voting for the same promises that are repeated every 4 years. Twenty-million votes were cast in 1992, twenty million angry voices convinced they had been abandoned by the political elite. John F. Kennedy was far behind Nixon in the election of 1960 because he was "too young", "too inexperienced", and thus "couldn’t win." An obscure mayor of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota and former professional wrestler named Jesse Ventura was cast aside as an outsider with no chance of winning by the previous Governor of Minnesota. The only wasted vote is a vote with its roots in fear. The Republican and Democratic elite are the only ones with genuine reason to fear the future. Using demogogery, scare tactics and blatant lies, both parties will stop at nothing to prevent you, the American Citizen, from voting your conscience because they just might end up losing their job. Do not give in. Imagine if abolitionists just decided to quit their efforts because ending slavery would "ruin" the nation’s economy. Imagine if Martin Luther King and Malcom X, among many others, just decided to accept Jim Crowe laws because it "might make things worse". As a matter of fact, why not just play dead, because to your government you just might as well be dead. Those who never try are forever doomed to fail. You may not agree with my views, those of the Libertarian Party or Mr. Browne. Unlike the current polarized political establishment, The Libertarian Party welcomes and embraces ideological diversity as part of the great American tradition known as liberty. Choosing to think and act in life as you wish is synonymous with the same activism and inquest that Republicans and Democrats abhor and seek to destroy. Why? Because free thinkers among the entire political and ideological spectrum brave enough to speak out have long posed the greatest threat to monolithic ideologies throughout history. Great movements always start with a small step. http://www.harrybrowne2000.com Please feel free to forward this to your co-workers, friends and family. Even if you disagree with everything said herein, in "Marketplace of ideas," there is no such thing as a wasted message. Bush and Gore and many others have long sought to prevent such a marketplace from forming, however ideas have and will continue to flourish. VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE VOTE FREEDOM VOTE LIBERTARIAN

Response:

VOTE LIBERTY VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE VOTE LIBERTARIAN Who needs faith in Washington Anyway?

This message couldn’t be clearer! Let’s get this obscene montrosity we call government out of our lives! The debate last tuesday made ir obvious that it was not really a debate at all. Both candidates really want to control your life and my life. When govt creeps into our bedrooms, our medicine chests, and lord knows what else it has gone too far! I say NO to Washington, and I hate both dems and repubs! If you want to live your life in slavery to the state, that;s your business. But I want to be free. I will vote LIbertarian! I hope you’ll join me!!!

Response:

Happy Earth Day!

admin — Sat, 22 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

I plan on picking up the dog poop (opps..hubby will do it..I get too freaked out) that some dope lets his dog do-do in front of my house and my neighbor’s house. God..I would love to catch him/her. Happy Earth Day..hey, they say it all turns to dust anyway..LOL. LN

Response:

GiottoLady wrote: > x-no-archive: yes > Monkey writes: > >> … get a ‘no junk mail’ sticker for your mailbox. > I haven’t heard about these before. Is this a Canadian thing? It’s a great > idea.

Hi Kathy, I’m not sure if the idea is Canadian but in Canada if you have a ‘no flyers please’, ‘no junk mail’, ‘no unaddressed mail please’ or similar notice on your front door, on or in your mailbox, so long as it is obvious and legible Canada Post will not deliver unaddressed mail to you. Canada Post delivers a majority of junk mail. Most other people and companies that deliver stuff door-to-door respect it to. It works for me – I don’t get junk mail. Perhaps there are similar actions you can take in the US. http://www.junkbusters.com/ht/en/index.html — monkey http://pages.hotbot.com/health/sillychickens/index.html —

Response:

I plan on going outside and patroling my alley and the field next to it and pick up all the trash that blows over from the high school. The older kids like to party in the park and leave their beer bottles, etc so I will pick them up and put them in a big trash bag to make the place look a little nicer. So happy Earth Day to you, too. Ida monkey wrote in message

news:3901C117.89636D4E@donotspammehome.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi, > It’s April 22nd! Earth Day! I hope people here have a good one! > Get out and appreciate the Earth! > Forget about (well try to!) OCD for a while and do something for > the planet! > … plant a tree. > … walk to work, school or errands more often. > … attend an Earth Day event. ( http://www.earthday.net/ ) > … get a ‘no junk mail’ sticker for your mailbox. > … write letters to politicians about local enviro concerns. > … learn about ’shopping with a conscious’. > … take social and political action! ( > http://www.sierraclub.org/activism/everyday.html ) > … at least just think about what you can do to help the > environment or make it worse > I hesitated sending this but what the heck! People post Easter, > Xmas and Passover wishes and since I’m not religious but care > deeply (religiously!) about the Earth, I wish everyone a good > Earth Day! > — > monkey – mon…@gilligansisland.net > > http://pages.hotbot.com/health/sillychickens/index.html > —

Response:

Hi, It’s April 22nd! Earth Day! I hope people here have a good one! Get out and appreciate the Earth! Forget about (well try to!) OCD for a while and do something for the planet! … plant a tree. … walk to work, school or errands more often. … attend an Earth Day event. ( http://www.earthday.net/ ) … get a ‘no junk mail’ sticker for your mailbox. … write letters to politicians about local enviro concerns. … learn about ’shopping with a conscious’. … take social and political action! ( http://www.sierraclub.org/activism/everyday.html ) … at least just think about what you can do to help the environment or make it worse I hesitated sending this but what the heck! People post Easter, Xmas and Passover wishes and since I’m not religious but care deeply (religiously!) about the Earth, I wish everyone a good Earth Day! — monkey – mon…@gilligansisland.net http://pages.hotbot.com/health/sillychickens/index.html —

Response:

Any info will help

admin — Thu, 02 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

I’m a 32 yr. female…adopted in North Carolina all i know is my mom was a prostitute and killed in atlanta , Ga….this is all the info i have and can get….. where do i go from here? Please send email. Thanks

Response:

Who told you that? Your aparents? Maybe it’s true, maybe it isn’t. It does sound like one of those awful stories told to discourage search. But if you’ve come to terms with that, you’ll probably be able to handle it if she turns out to be alive and a top executive at Phillip Morris who relaxes at lesbian leather bars on the weekends. Or a prizewinning Jello-recipe developer with 6 kids and a goat farm in rural Missouri. Or a trailblazing woman-lumberjack. Or a plus-size model with 2 illegitimate children who she kept who also breeds pug dogs. The possibilities are limitless. Damsel Damsel Plum Co-founder & Publications Chair BASTARD NATION http://www.bastards.org

Response:

Please do not use any of those commercial search services they are all a rip off. There are other ways around using vultures who pray on the pain of people involved in an adoption situation. Audrey do you work for 1800 Ussearch and why would you reccomend them to anyone?? Karen

Response:

You should call 1800 ussearch. They are good at finding people. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m a 32 yr. female…adopted in North Carolina all i know is my mom was a prostitute and killed in atlanta , Ga….this is all the info i have and can get….. where do i go from here? Please send email. Thanks Diane, First and foremost write to your state’s social services post-adoption unit office, or the agency that handled your adoption, and request your non-id info. Register with ISRR. And go to "Shea’s Search Series" (an excellent search/reunion resource, and the place to start) to know how to proceed with your search. Good luck! Cheryl, reunited adoptee Arizona State Director, Bastard Nation Shea’s Search Series: http://www.plumsite.com/shea/series.html ISRR: http://www.plumsite.com/isrr/ Vital Records Info: http://vitalrec.com/index.html Volunteer Search Network: http://www.vsn.org/ Voices of Adoption: http://www.ibar.com/voices/./ C.A.R.E. http://www.reunionregistry.org/ Bastard Nation (contacts by state): http://www.bastards.org/activism/contacts.htm

Response:

Oh God Damz… that made me laugh my head off !! (or as some here say ROTFLO, or whatever it is) Images of pug eyeballs rolling on the carpet, while traumatized children run screaming from the house. Heh heh.

Response:

I agree with Damz, sounds like a "story" to me. In fact, all you are missing is the famous car crash addition, and then you’d really have the quintessential adoptive parent fairy tale told to potentially ungrateful adoptees who might think of searching for their birthfamily. Course, it *could* all be true, (I actually know a foster mom who’s foster son has a birthmom that was and still IS a prostitute/drug addict), but I sure wouldn’t take anyone other than your birthmother’s word for it. Since she may be dead, the word of someone she knew would also be helpful. Time to do some investigating on your own NC adoptee. Get your non-id info, and see what you can find out from there. This site will help to get you started:

Response:

Or a plus-size model with 2 illegitimate children who she kept who also breeds pug dogs. The possibilities are limitless. Damzy…dear one! Just how the hell do illegitimate children get to breed Pugs?!

I LOVE PUGS!!!!!! My hubby won’t let me get one because he says he is afraid that their eyes will fall out of their head onto the carpet and traumatize the children. geez – talk about morbid imagination… ;P Hi Patty!!! Damzy Damsel Plum Co-founder & Publications Chair BASTARD NATION http://www.bastards.org

Response:

Response:

I’m a 32 yr. female…adopted in North Carolina all i know is my mom was a prostitute and killed in atlanta , Ga….this is all the info i have and can get….. where do i go from here? Please send email. Thanks

Diane, First and foremost write to your state’s social services post-adoption unit office, or the agency that handled your adoption, and request your non-id info. Register with ISRR. And go to "Shea’s Search Series" (an excellent search/reunion resource, and the place to start) to know how to proceed with your search. Good luck! Cheryl, reunited adoptee Arizona State Director, Bastard Nation Shea’s Search Series: http://www.plumsite.com/shea/series.html ISRR: http://www.plumsite.com/isrr/ Vital Records Info: http://vitalrec.com/index.html Volunteer Search Network: http://www.vsn.org/ Voices of Adoption: http://www.ibar.com/voices/./ C.A.R.E. http://www.reunionregistry.org/ Bastard Nation (contacts by state): http://www.bastards.org/activism/contacts.htm

Response:

What does "love one another" mean?

admin — Sun, 29 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

You people have to learn how to snip correctly - I said this.<<< Would you please explain your objections to the manner in which I snipped something? I’m not saying that I would change, but it’s more likely if you can explain the obstensively "correct" protocol. On the other hand, it may be that you need to learn to tolerate improperly snipped messages. I don’t know the answer without more information.

I said " you people" since I don’t know who did it,..probably NOT you… but this is that it said: Some of us are a bit touchy about "christians" whose whole goal in life is making our lives miserable because we are gay – based on Leviticus. <<< .

As you can see, it says "Starbuck said….followed by what I had written (who knows how many posts back) previously. That’s all. No need to feel offended. You don’t even "have to change"! This has happened repeatedly – I’ve probably screwed some up too. You should at least try to leave all the names of the previous posters, then those with better eye coordination than I have can follow the little thingies down and figure out who said what. I don’t have time to answer the rest. — Chuck Sommers snip

Response:

Well, you know that this heathen wouldn’t feel left out. Let’s take a

poll, shall we? Anyway…the real question that you’re asking other christians, to be applied (one presumes) to other christians is a hard one. You are not to judge; you are to "love one another"; Christ seemed to prefer the company of hardcases and castoffs. I’d say that tolerance, and *help* toward living a better life (including a more tolerant one) is what is being called for, not fingershaking admonishment or ostracising "for their own good". At least that’s what I’d *like* christians to think the words meant..<<< Hum, that’s interesting. You have an opinion of what you think Christians should be saying and doing, and even an opinion about what you think the Christian message ought to be. And yet you also say that you are not willing to "sign up" and make your life a part of the effort. I’ll file your comments in the (ahem) "appropriate place". :::::::::shrug:::::::: The 7 traditional Christian virtues are Courage Wisdom Truth Justice Faith Hope Charity. I agree with you that Christianity is, in part, about making a better life, and assisting other persons in their effort toward that end. (See "wisdom" and "Charity" above). However, one looks in vain for the word "tolerance" as a traditional virtue. Frankly, I believe that the social value of "Tolerance" is frequently overstated. — To respond via email remove the "X" from the address.

Response:

You people have to learn how to snip correctly - I said this.<<<

Would you please explain your objections to the manner in which I snipped something? I’m not saying that I would change, but it’s more likely if you can explain the obstensively "correct" protocol. On the other hand, it may be that you need to learn to tolerate improperly snipped messages. I don’t know the answer without more information. No, certainly 45 years ago gays were so in the closet there was no talk

about them.<<< I wouldn’t say that "there was no talk about them". It might be accurate to say that there was no widespread social acceptance of the behavior. It wasn’t a secret that such things were done. There was even public knowledge of the sexual activity of certain personages such as Oscar Wilde, and Rock Hudson. Then of course, there were those passages in Romans and Leviticus. Have the Mormons spent over a million dollars in just two states fighting

or/against anything other than gay marriage?<<< Mormans believe in the Jesus that appeared to the Indians, and whose death on the cross at Jerusalem was NOT in propitiation for the sins of all mankind for all time, and that God the Father is NOT a spiritual entity but rather a corporal being like you and me. One could make a dispassionate and objective theological argument that they worship a different "Jesus" other than the historic Jesus of Nazareth, and a different "God" altogether, and therefore aren’t "Christians" at all…certainly not "orthodox" believing Christians. They have a completely different religion derived from freemasonry and Islam, combined with the vivid imagination of it’s founders, but then that’s an entirely other issue. Aren’t you aware of what the code word "family values" stands for?<<<

Most conservative Christians that I know don’t feel that it’s necessary to speak in code. Many are concerned about the high incidence of divorce, single parent families, willingness to take responsibility for one’s own offspring, and emotionally safe upbringing for their children. Isn’t that what "family values" means? Does any other "sin" keep a boy out of the boy scouts? (even if he hasn’t

actually done anything yet, but just says it’s his orientation.)<<< I don’t know. I was never in scouts. Do any other behaviors keep a kid out of scouts? I’d guess probably yes. Falwell said they make so much money from gay scare tactics letters that

"If homosexuality didn’t exist we would have had to invent it".<<< You seem to be implying that this is a direct quotation by Falwell. Is that the impression that you are trying to protray? and if so, do you have a reference of the time and date that he said that? It’s virtually the whole agenda ( in additon to abortion) for Focus on

Family, Falwell, Kennedy et.al. Are their no other "sins" to campaign against?<<< I’ve been paying attention to "Focus on the Family" and subscribing to it’s publications for about 20 years now. To say that abortion and homosexuality is "virtually it’s whole agenda" is (to state it politely) simply a false statement. Such widespread attempts to mischaracterize their perceived opposition creates a definite credibility problem for persons who are attempting to garner public support for homosexual activism. He, of course, wants to expand sodomy laws to jail gays, want to keep

gays out of "certain professions, such as teaching, and said "discrimination" against gays (when asked about housing, jobs,) was ok in this case since the bible says clearly it’s a sin.<<< The preacher (from Southern Baptist Seminary) <<<

I believe you when you say that he said such things. That is probably the position of many, perhaps most, conservative Christians. — To respond via email remove the "X" from the address.

Response:

You people have to learn how to snip correctly - I said this. Some of us are a bit touchy about "christians" whose whole goal in life is making our lives miserable because we are gay – based on Leviticus. <<< Interesting. In 45 years of church attendance (even in some of the most conservative churches) I have never yet found even ONE individual who had made that his life’s work. If that were true, I’d understand the touchyness.

No, certainly 45 years ago gays were so in the closet there was no talk about them. Most people thought they didn’t know any. (Even the gay people.). "LIFES work wasn’t quite accurate – since people get tired of issues eventualy, the money grubbers have to switch now and then. Have the Mormons spent over a million dollars in just two states fighting for/against anything other than gay marriage? Have you seen any full page ads or tv commercials for anything other than anti-gay ads (from cons. religious groups)? There are dozens (hundreds?) of web sites agains gays – all use religious "reasons". Aren’t you aware of what the code word "family values" stands for? Does any other "sin" keep a boy out of the boy scouts? (even if he hasn’t actually done anything yet, but just says it’s his orientation.) When "communist" threat was no longer available they switched to ‘liberal threat", then "abortionist threat" and now it’s "homosexual agenda threat". Falwell said they make so much money from gay scare tactics letters that "If homosexuality didn’t exist we would have had to invent it". It’s virtually the whole agenda ( in additon to abortion) for Focus on Family, Falwell, Kennedy et.al. Are their no other "sins" to campaign against? The preacher (from Southern Baptist Seminary) on Larry King last night said America was at a crossroads – the homosexual agenda was a plot and either America turned to God and rejected them or it would pay the consequences, and that this was the greatest crisis we have faced.!!! Homosexuals were out to destroy everything we stood for. He, of course, wants to expand sodomy laws to jail gays, want to keep gays out of "certain professions, such as teaching, and said "discrimination" against gays (when asked about housing, jobs,) was ok in this case since the bible says clearly it’s a sin. (but then, I’ve never met Phred Phelps, either.)

Right, unfortunately he is just the most "public" in his hatred. The many other much bigger, more influential groups who pull the strings in congress are just as extreme, but not in public. — Chuck Sommers – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — To respond via email remove the "X" from the address.

Response:

– Remove XXX to contact

— disagree with you about certain aspects of homosexuality. Period. I believe you disagree with God on these same aspects, and also on several important others. The one’s you don’t agree with him about, I believe, put your very faith under question.

M: Well, you can believe what you want but I just disagree, that’s all. It’s incredible that you can question my faith because of this. This is what I mean about legalists and their claims: the arrogance and insensitivity so apparent to the rest of us just doesn’t register for them. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I couldn’t in good conscience let you go unchallenged any more than I’d let you jump under a bus. Further, as Paul points out, Christ will judge. I’m willing to undergo that judgment as a gay man trying to live an honorable Christian life. I don’t need self-appointed judges telling me I am sinful because I want a committed, monogomous, relationship with another Christian man. I’ve repented the misuse of my sexuality. That’s all that needs to be said. (I’m trying not to be harsh – just plainly speaking my piece.) I hear you. I don’t know what I’d do without my Sherri. I’d certainly have an aching heart for her company, her smiles, her wisdom. I doubt I’d have four such wonderful, loving sons as God has blessed she and I with, if I hadn’t married her. And our sexual relationship is such an important part of our intimacy.

M: Well, good for you. I sorry you won’t let me have that. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It is not right that the man be alone, but on the other hand maybe God has given you a wonderful gift. "I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God– what is good and acceptable and perfect." God doesn’t just drop suffering or temptation on us for no reason. God has promised to bless those who suffer for his sake. And God ALWAYS keeps his promises. My prayers are with you. Daniel Pflager

M: As I’ve said before, we just disagree, that’s all. It’s easy for you to tell me to live a life you aren’t required to follow. That’s what gets me about straights: they just assume they are right and the rest of us are just wrong. It’s so frustrating. Well, I give up trying to convince you. It’s quite clear you will not be moved. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — Remove XXX to contact — Remove XXX to contact Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should… a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager The correct answer is "C": [quotation of 1 Cor 13 omitted] I don’t notice anything here about "leaving each other alone" or correcting each other and "pointing out their sins." In fact, this, the greatest definition of love I’ve ever seen, doesn’t mention sin at all. What about "it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth"? If I truly love someone, I do not want that person to persist in behaviors that are harmful to him or her. M: That is true, but Paul didn’t say, "correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them." Pointing out others’ sins an correcting them seems rather arrogant and rude to me (as well as insisting on its own way). Encouragement is great; it’s what comes before I take issue with. But didn’t Paul say this to Timothy? 2 Timothy 4:1-2 "When Christ Jesus comes as King, he will be the judge of everyone, whether they are living or dead. So with God and Christ as witnesses, I command you to preach God’s message. Do it willingly, even if it isn’t the popular thing to do. You must correct people and point out their sins. But also cheer them up, and when you instruct them, always be patient." Obedientia et Pax, Daniel Pflager M: This tit for tat could go on forever. He was talking to ~Timothy~ not you.

Oh, I see. So Christ was always talking to someone else? Not to you or me? And, of course, Paul was always talking to someone else too? In that case, we’d better just throw out Holy Scripture altogether, because it wasn’t meant to be read by me and you, Mycroft. Also, as I’ve pointed out before, you are only human and not infallible or all-knowing.

Human and infallible is why I need Holy Scripture as a guide and a foundation. Without it, and without seeking to obey God’s Word, I wouldn’t have anything meaningful to say. As it is, I pray daily that God use me, and that my words should simply be his words echoed. Who are you to tell the rest of us was is or is not sin?

I am nothing, but God’s Word is very plain, and our consciences can be too. I disagree with you about certain aspects of homosexuality. Period.

I believe you disagree with God on these same aspects, and also on several important others. The one’s you don’t agree with him about, I believe, put your very faith under question. I couldn’t in good conscience let you go unchallenged any more than I’d let you jump under a bus. Further, as Paul points out, Christ will judge. I’m willing to undergo that judgment as a gay man trying to live an honorable Christian life. I don’t need self-appointed judges telling me I am sinful because I want a committed, monogomous, relationship with another Christian man. I’ve repented the misuse of my sexuality. That’s all that needs to be said. (I’m trying not to be harsh – just plainly speaking my piece.)

I hear you. I don’t know what I’d do without my Sherri. I’d certainly have an aching heart for her company, her smiles, her wisdom. I doubt I’d have four such wonderful, loving sons as God has blessed she and I with, if I hadn’t married her. And our sexual relationship is such an important part of our intimacy. It is not right that the man be alone, but on the other hand maybe God has given you a wonderful gift. "I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God– what is good and acceptable and perfect." God doesn’t just drop suffering or temptation on us for no reason. God has promised to bless those who suffer for his sake. And God ALWAYS keeps his promises. My prayers are with you. Daniel Pflager

Response:

Some of us are a bit touchy about "christians" whose whole goal in life

is making our lives miserable because we are gay – based on Leviticus. <<< Interesting. In 45 years of church attendance (even in some of the most conservative churches) I have never yet found even ONE individual who had made that his life’s work. If that were true, I’d understand the touchyness. (but then, I’ve never met Phred Phelps, either.) — To respond via email remove the "X" from the address.

Response:

a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify)

Now, given that, why *not* use your energies in correcting the sins of your fellow christians rather than starting in on the rest of us? There’s a plenty of correction to be done, isn’t there? So go to it.<<< We’re working on it. And I agree with you that people within the household of faith should receive priority for instruction and correction. But we are talking about a very "well diversified operation", if you will. We wouldn’t want to ignore the pagans entirely. They’d feel left out. — To respond via email remove the "X" from the address.

Response:

We’re working on it. And I agree with you that people within the household of faith should receive priority for instruction and correction. But we are talking about a very "well diversified operation", if you will. We wouldn’t want to ignore the pagans entirely. They’d feel left out.

Well, you know that this heathen wouldn’t feel left out. Let’s take a poll, shall we? Anyway…the real question that you’re asking other christians, to be applied (one presumes) to other christians is a hard one. You are not to judge; you are to "love one another"; Christ seemed to prefer the company of hardcases and castoffs. I’d say that tolerance, and *help* toward living a better life (including a more tolerant one) is what is being called for, not fingershaking admonishment or ostracising "for their own good". At least that’s what I’d *like* christians to think the words meant… Shell though you know that it can be interpreted either way depending on the tolerance or desire to ostracize of the particular christian reading it — email is shell 4747 at my-deja and so on

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — Remove XXX to contact Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should… a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager The correct answer is "C": [quotation of 1 Cor 13 omitted] I don’t notice anything here about "leaving each other alone" or correcting each other and "pointing out their sins." In fact, this, the greatest definition of love I’ve ever seen, doesn’t mention sin at all. What about "it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth"? If I truly love someone, I do not want that person to persist in behaviors that are harmful to him or her. M: That is true, but Paul didn’t say, "correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them." Pointing out others’ sins an correcting them seems rather arrogant and rude to me (as well as insisting on its own way). Encouragement is great; it’s what comes before I take issue with.

But didn’t Paul say this to Timothy? 2 Timothy 4:1-2 "When Christ Jesus comes as King, he will be the judge of everyone, whether they are living or dead. So with God and Christ as witnesses, I command you to preach God’s message. Do it willingly, even if it isn’t the popular thing to do. You must correct people and point out their sins. But also cheer them up, and when you instruct them, always be patient." Obedientia et Pax, Daniel Pflager

Response:

– Remove XXX to contact

— Remove XXX to contact

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should… a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager The correct answer is "C": [quotation of 1 Cor 13 omitted] I don’t notice anything here about "leaving each other alone" or correcting each other and "pointing out their sins." In fact, this, the greatest definition of love I’ve ever seen, doesn’t mention sin at all. What about "it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth"? If I truly love someone, I do not want that person to persist in behaviors that are harmful to him or her. M: That is true, but Paul didn’t say, "correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them." Pointing out others’ sins an correcting them seems rather arrogant and rude to me (as well as insisting on its own way). Encouragement is great; it’s what comes before I take issue with. But didn’t Paul say this to Timothy? 2 Timothy 4:1-2 "When Christ Jesus comes as King, he will be the judge of everyone, whether they are living or dead. So with God and Christ as witnesses, I command you to preach God’s message. Do it willingly, even if it isn’t the popular thing to do. You must correct people and point out their sins. But also cheer them up, and when you instruct them, always be patient." Obedientia et Pax, Daniel Pflager

M: This tit for tat could go on forever. He was talking to ~Timothy~ not you. Also, as I’ve pointed out before, you are only human and not infallible or all-knowing. Who are you to tell the rest of us was is or is not sin? I disagree with you about certain aspects of homosexuality. Period. Further, as Paul points out, Christ will judge. I’m willing to undergo that judgment as a gay man trying to live an honorable Christian life. I don’t need self-appointed judges telling me I am sinful because I want a committed, monogomous, relationship with another Christian man. I’ve repented the misuse of my sexuality. That’s all that needs to be said. (I’m trying not to be harsh – just plainly speaking my piece.) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

snip

snip I don’t believe that eating pork chops on a Friday is a sin, and I can’t imagine were you derived that idea. Must be a Catholic thing. It used to be a sin. Now it’s not, apparently. Too late for the fish stocks, though…

snip I suspect the poster was refering to the "abomination" of touching any part of a pig, let alone eating it. Some of us are a bit touchy about "christians" whose whole goal in life is making our lives miserable because we are gay – based on Leviticus. Selective use of two verses from Leviticus to support centuries of persecution while ignoring most of the rest of it strikes us as a being tiny bit hypocritical . And the "Friday" part is no doubt poking fun at the once sin, now non-sin of eating meat on Friday… which makes one question any "sin" not based on an objective reason. — Chuck Sommers Elroy is more flexible, I guess. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Shell mmmmm….flexible…. — email at shell4747 at my-deja yadayada, if you must

Response:

Clean up your own camp first, before you go out trying to

point out other people’s sins. Clean up the TV evangelists and scammers, then we can talk about my sinful habit of eating pork chops on Friday.<<<< I don’t believe that it is reasonable to expect Christians to have arrived at perfection before we take the first steps in communication. If we do that, we’ll never have a message to deliver to the world, because only God is perfect. People are not. I don’t believe that eating pork chops on a Friday is a sin, and I can’t imagine were you derived that idea. Must be a Catholic thing. I freely admit that there are plenty of sinning scammers and schemers that use Christianity for their own selfish means. In a country with religious freedom, the rest of us have no authority over their behavior. There are some ministrys (such as Hank Hannigraf of CSI, our own priest on Sunday mornings, and others) who feel called to denounce false religious teachers publicly. I’m not sure that we can really do much more than that. Do you have any ideas? — To respond via email remove the "X" from the address.

Response:

Clean up your own camp first, before you go out trying to point out other people’s sins. Clean up the TV evangelists and scammers, then we can talk about my sinful habit of eating pork chops on Friday.<<<< I don’t believe that it is reasonable to expect Christians to have arrived at perfection before we take the first steps in communication. If we do that, we’ll never have a message to deliver to the world, because only God is perfect. People are not.

Indeed, but the question was: Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should… a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify)

Now, given that, why *not* use your energies in correcting the sins of your fellow christians rather than starting in on the rest of us? There’s a plenty of correction to be done, isn’t there? So go to it. I don’t believe that eating pork chops on a Friday is a sin, and I can’t imagine were you derived that idea. Must be a Catholic thing.

It used to be a sin. Now it’s not, apparently. Too late for the fish stocks, though… I freely admit that there are plenty of sinning scammers and schemers that use Christianity for their own selfish means. In a country with religious freedom, the rest of us have no authority over their behavior. There are some ministrys (such as Hank Hannigraf of CSI, our own priest on Sunday mornings, and others) who feel called to denounce false religious teachers publicly. I’m not sure that we can really do much more than that. Do you have any ideas?

I don’t insist that Christians be perfect before preaching to me. I insist that they not preach to me at all. Elroy is more flexible, I guess. Shell mmmmm….flexible…. — email at shell4747 at my-deja yadayada, if you must

Response:

– Remove XXX to contact

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should… a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager The correct answer is "C": [quotation of 1 Cor 13 omitted] I don’t notice anything here about "leaving each other alone" or correcting each other and "pointing out their sins." In fact, this, the greatest definition of love I’ve ever seen, doesn’t mention sin at all. What about "it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth"? If I truly love someone, I do not want that person to persist in behaviors that are harmful to him or her.

M: That is true, but Paul didn’t say, "correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them." Pointing out others’ sins an correcting them seems rather arrogant and rude to me (as well as insisting on its own way). Encouragement is great; it’s what comes before I take issue with. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — John Edwards A suggestion: maybe you should heed St. Paul’s advice: patience, kindness, humility, good-nature, hope, endurance, belief. These are more important than picking out the motes in others’ eyes. Mycroft

Response:

Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should… a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager

b) with much care! Christ certainly didn’t avoid pointing out sin, but was gracious. (Samaritan woman, woman caught in adultery, Zacheaus, etc.) a) is certainly incorrect following our Lord’s example If we leave each other alone, especially the heathen, how can that be loving when they are headed to Hell??? — Being Politically Correct means Always Having to Say You’re Sorry. ( / / |\ / _/ {|} `o / .—. \ _ ,–’ / / , ( `^^^ / ( ) ) ) jgs ) /__ __ ) ( ___ (___)))__))(__))(__))) . . |_ ._. _ * _ |_ ._ [_)[ (_) * |(_)[ )[ ) ._|

Response:

says... Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should... a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager

Daniel: Leave them alone or point out their sins? You sound like the perfect traditional christian! Are you free for lunch and a rebuke next Wednesday? E-mail me, dear! SON O GOD

Response:

Clean up your own camp first, before you go out trying to point out other people's sins. Clean up the TV evangelists and scammers, then we can talk about my sinful habit of eating pork chops on Friday. -- Elroy Willis BAAWA (Undercover News Division) http://www.cyberramp.net/~elo/news

Response:

- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - says... Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should... a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager Daniel: Leave them alone or point out their sins? You sound like the perfect traditional christian! Are you free for lunch and a rebuke next Wednesday? E-mail me, dear! SON O GOD

Thou shalt not covert thy neighbours ass. Says nothing about your neighbours wifes ass so I guess it's all about free love. New thread ? Why does the bible encourage adultery ? High Wombat and Spiritual Advisor - AGM Registered Heathen # 1522 Here's to the heroes and half empty bottles. The hard to wake keepers of incomplete dreams. Here's to their heartbreak and the heartache that makes em, crack as their lives come apart at the seams. (Bob Neuwirth)

Response:

Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should... a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify)

It means love them. Be kind to them. Show warmth. Look for the best angle at which your message may be most likely to fall on ears that will hear. Manner of the message is important. If you screech at people, they will turn away, but if you woo them, there is a chance of reaching their hearts. - Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager

Response:

Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should... a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) It means love them. Be kind to them. Show warmth. Look for the best angle at which your message may be most likely to fall on ears that will hear. Manner of the message is important. If you screech at people, they will turn away, but if you woo them, there is a chance of reaching their hearts.

I understand what you're saying Claire. Clearly, my newsgroup approach is not the one I'll use in Alpha, or one-on-one very often. But a newsgroup is not an intimate communication medium, and IMO doesn't lends itself much to subtlety. I recognize that people may feel I am bigotted, and over-simple, but I've rarely found a situation in which things were actually as complicated as people make them. I may be dismissed for screeching, but I hope won't be condemned for not trying. I tell you what, if you commit to responding to these same kinds of posts, I'll pay attention and see if I can learn something. Deal? Obedientia et Pax, Daniel Pflager

Response:

- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should... a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager The correct answer is "C": "If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing. "Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. "Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end. For we know only in part and prophecy in part; but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. And now faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love." 1 Corinthians 13 (NRSV) I don't notice anything here about "leaving each other alone" or correcting each other and "pointing out their sins." In fact, this, the greatest definition of love I've ever seen, doesn't mention sin at all. A suggestion: maybe you should heed St. Paul's advice: patience, kindness, humility, good-nature, hope, endurance, belief. These are more important than picking out the motes in others' eyes.

I guess I can accept His challenge, even from you. I wonder if you are prepared to accept Christ's? Perhaps you'd share something more about yourself? So tell me Mycroft, where do you attend? I attend St. John's Episcopal in Kirkland, WA. How old are you? I am 39. Obedientia et Pax, Daniel Pflager

Response:

- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text - Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should... a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager The correct answer is "C": [quotation of 1 Cor 13 omitted] I don’t notice anything here about "leaving each other alone" or correcting each other and "pointing out their sins." In fact, this, the greatest definition of love I’ve ever seen, doesn’t mention sin at all.

What about "it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth"? If I truly love someone, I do not want that person to persist in behaviors that are harmful to him or her. — John Edwards – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -A suggestion: maybe you should heed St. Paul’s advice: patience, kindness, humility, good-nature, hope, endurance, belief. These are more important than picking out the motes in others’ eyes. Mycroft

Response:

Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should… a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager

Response:

Does loving one another in Christ mean that we should… a) just leave one another alone, even if we know they are in sin. b) correct people, point out their sins, and encourage them. c) other (please amplify) Obedientia et Pax Daniel Pflager

The correct answer is "C": "If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing. "Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. "Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end. For we know only in part and prophecy in part; but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. And now faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love." 1 Corinthians 13 (NRSV) I don’t notice anything here about "leaving each other alone" or correcting each other and "pointing out their sins." In fact, this, the greatest definition of love I’ve ever seen, doesn’t mention sin at all. A suggestion: maybe you should heed St. Paul’s advice: patience, kindness, humility, good-nature, hope, endurance, belief. These are more important than picking out the motes in others’ eyes. Mycroft

Response: