Conference hydra::dejavu

> "Many church figures [...] are questioning the wisdom of permitting such a
> filming."

  I'm no church figure, but I'd question the wisdom of permitting the
  ritual itself, never mind the filming. I'll be watchin' for it
  tonight!

Mike, why do you question permitting the ritual?  Is it personal belief and 
if so, what do you believe?

Mostly what I find amusing about the Catholic Church and their attitude about
exorcism is that they publicly deny the reality of possession, but still 
maintain the training and rites to combat it if it should occur.  And they 
exhaust all other possible causes (aliments or fraud) before admitting that 
the ritual needs to be done.  For the Catholic Church, exorcism is a last
resort.

Beth

    re: .2, (Beth),
    	
    	Like the expression,
    
    		"expect the best, prepare for the worst ?"
    
    				todd

    re: 1
    
    Did anyone see the 20/20 programme?  Unfortunatly, due to being over
    hear in England I did'nt catch it.  
    
    Cheers
    
    Heather

>Mike, why do you question permitting the ritual?  Is it personal belief and 
>if so, what do you believe?

  I was partly joking, but on the serious side ...

  There are several possibilities. One is that the whole business of
  possession by demons and exorcism is delusion, in which case
  charlatans shouldn't be allowed to manipulate naive sufferers.

  Another possibility is that the demons and possession are real (both
  physically as well as emotionally), in which case one would hope that
  only people who really know what they're doing should be doing such
  things, lest the cure be worse than the disease.

  The fact that the folks involved were going for prime time coverage is
  a possible indication that either (1) the whole thing is a sham and
  they're just doing it for the publicity, or (2) they're not competent
  practitioners of a dangerous craft. In either case, performing the
  ritual would be ethically wrong.

  Of course, they could be competent, and there could be a good,
  constructive reason to broadcast the ritual on a show with similar
  appeal to "Geraldo". It's just that this would be the least probable
  of all possibilities. Not impossible, but improbable.

I have heard some of what it takes for a Catholic priest to be vested into
learning the ritual (it is not something all priests have access to, only
a select few who have gone through rigorous evaluation), and I doubt that the
priest in charge was a deliberate charlatan.

I did see bits of the broadcast, and the pertinent info is that after the 
church was initially approached, there was 6 months of investigation before 
a church authority approved the ritual (a Bishop, I think).  The team included
a psychiatrist, a doctor, nurse aids (for physical restraint), the priest,
and one or two others that I don't remember their functions.  I quit watching
when they said the next scenes would be from the exorcism...I don't know why,
but I didn't feel comfortable with the thought of watching something that, if
real, should have been very, very, private.

I can't say whether the ritual should have been done or not - I want to trust
in the church's investigative methods in determining need.  I just don't think
it should have been televised.  And the forum used to broadcast was 
sensationalist type - filled with bits and pieces of the exorcism during the
preliminaries, just to keep your interest up.  I felt that it may have done
harm to the image of the Catholic church.

Beth

>>I felt that it may have done harm to the image of the Catholic church.


	When 20/20 asked the priest involved WHY it was being 
televised - his statement was to the effect that the Catholic Church 
wanted to show that evil (the devil) is very alive in today's world - 
I guess they were hoping this might bring people "back".

       I don't want to get into this too much, but to make a few
    basic comments:
    
        This behavior (by the girl) is basically a result of an
    undesired manifestation of a lower level astral being (or 
    beings, in the case of this girl.)  This type of event is 
    easier for adolescents to replicate based on several criteria
    among them being a chemically (hormonally) driven sparking
    of very active imagination (therefore allowing the channeling
    to occur) and belief systems (opening up the unconscious mind's
    ability to manifest.)  Moreover, it is more often girls that
    manifest in this way (rather than boys) because boys typically
    (traditionally) have more access to allowing those energies to
    be expressed.
         An "exorcist's" function is to call upon the channeled 
    entity to leave the "possessed" person alone...with the cooperation
    of the "possessed" (in fact, without the cooperation, on some level,
    the "possession" will continue) these channels can then be closed.
         This is NOT evidence of "Satan."
    
    
    Frederick
    

    re: .8, Frederick,
    	Interesting analysis.  If I read that right, you are saying that 
    	you believe that 'possession' as used in this case seems to be 
    	another name for the phenomena that is commonly referred to as 
    	'chanelling', 	except that a different class of entity is being 
    	manifested.
    
    	I never really thought about the possible connection between the 
    	two ideas before, it always seemed that there were some
    	significant qualitative differences in the results (e.g.
    	chanellers seem to retain more aspects of their own ego-identity,
    	whereas possession appears to result in very dramatic behavioral
    	changes.   Is this your perception, and do you attribute it do the
    	different types or classes of entites alone ?
    
    							todd
    	

    Re .8 (Fredrick):
    
    >    This behavior (by the girl) is basically a result of an
    >undesired manifestation of a lower level astral being (or 
    >beings, in the case of this girl.) ...
    
    That is one interpretation.  It might be correct; however,
    
    >     This is NOT evidence of "Satan."
    
    May or may not be a correct statement, either.
    
    "Possession" cases might be any of the following:
    
    o  Multiple personality disorder
    o  Neurological disfunction
    o  Channeling in the manner you suggest
    o  Using the subject as a "horse" for a spiritual "rider"
       (as in Vodoun, Macumba, etc.)
    o  Temporary or [attempted] permanent residence by a demonic
       or diabologic agent.
    
    Without further evidence, it's premature to rule any of the above out.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

  
  Re .8/.9 (Frederick/Todd)
  
  I'm not sure how to read this suggestion ... is it
      Possession = uncontrolled channelling
  or
      Possession = channelling of [lower/random/otherwise different] entity
  ?
  
  On a slightly different point - maybe covered elsewhere ? - does this
  explain why the Catholic church is so much against the Charismatic forms
  of religion ? ie., the former regard the latter as inciting possession ?
  
  [ Please note that I'm not trying to bash or smear either of the above
  religions as I know very little about charismatic groups (maybe this is
  not a valid name ?) and I 'drifted' from the RCC when developing my own
  beliefs. These are just questions, not traps ].
  
  Frank

    In the days of yore when someone exhibited strange behavioural
    patterns, they were often labelled as being "possessed". Sometimes (the
    non-fatal ;-) exorcisms held appeared to be successful in curing the
    disorder. Today, we are able to classify some of these symptoms with
    names such as psychotic, multiple personality disorders etc.

    We have also seen how a "sack of potatoes" (for example) can be
    elevated to the level of "god" status and the adherents to the potato
    religion will claim experiencable benefits => a demonstration of the
    power of belief maybe ?  

    My father has practised hypnotherapy occasionally and all who have
    witnessed have been absolutely astounded by his success rate and
    amazing recoveries he effected. I suspect, and dad does too, that part
    of the success is attributed the power of suggestion especially where
    the patient had a strong belief in dad's abilities..a kind of "faith
    healing". More amazing where the patients who to all intents and
    purposes where sceptical of the treatment and where rather taken aback
    by the results they personally experienced. We suspect that, deep down
    inside, they really wanted to believe.

    It can be argued that the Catholic priests, their psyche impregnated
    with the power of exorcism, effect a ritual which has a dramatic affect
    on the mind of the subject bringing about the exorcism ? This I feel,
    is the significance behind powerful ritual, in that it can concentrate
    the minds and faith, actualising benefits for the believers?

    Christ for example made some references to this power... "Your faith
    has made you whole"..."having the faith the size of a mustard seed can
    move mountains" ..."for our fight is not against flesh and blood, but
    against powers and principalities of the air".... ('scuse my quotes...
    they might not be totally accurate but I think you will agree the
    essence ?) What was he _really_ trying to tell us ? 

    I often wonder about these things... 

    -Brian


    

         Well, I'm not saying things *are* any particular way.
    I am simply saying that I find it non-sensical to believe
    in Satan, particularly and especially in view of this ritualized
    belief system.  If it *were* an example of Satan's power, then I
    would suggest to you that Satan isn't terribly powerful in
    the physical world.  I mean, this Satan character has to go around
    picking on young girls to do what?  vomit, scream, make lamps
    move?  Boy!  I'm impressed!
          Todd, most of the respected channeled entities are similarly
    respecting of us...in every case I am aware of PERMISSION is
    requested/granted to allow that entity to "borrow" the transmission
    capabilities of the body.  In no case do they abuse the privilege
    of the person whose body is being channeled through.  
          If Saddam Hussein were to suddenly be disincarnate, where
    along the astral path do you suppose you'd find him?  Don't you
    imagine that he would be one of the "vomiters, epitheters, lamp-
    throwers?"  Not a particularly highly evolved, loving or spiritual
    human is he...nor do I suspect he would likely be any better just
    by simply losing his flesh and bones.  We have discussed astral
    level beings before in here...they aren't particularly highly
    evolved...but there is a range from "bad" to "good" (or very good,
    maybe.)  
          Again, I submit that anybody or anynobody who grabs young
    girls and makes them vomit against their will, isn't terribly nice.
    I further submit that the "victims" used are exceptionally vulnerable
    to this type of manipulation...in large part based on beliefs and
    "power of suggestion" (as hinted at by .12 ::MACKRILL [sorry, your
    first name escapes me.)
          So, yes, Steve-arino, there are other *possibilities*, puts
    your moneys down, place your bets, then lead your life wherever 
    your fortune lies...as for me, I've looked and decided gambling
    on the part of religion just won't cut it...too many losers...
    
    Frederick
    

    Re .13 (Fredrick):

    >I am simply saying that I find it non-sensical to believe
    >in Satan, particularly and especially in view of this ritualized
    >belief system.  If it *were* an example of Satan's power, then I
    >would suggest to you that Satan isn't terribly powerful in
    >the physical world.  I mean, this Satan character has to go around
    >picking on young girls to do what?  vomit, scream, make lamps
    >move?  Boy!  I'm impressed!
    
    Within the Christian perspective (or even Roman Catholic subset thereof)
    there's often a sort of mental laziness these days to ascribe anything 
    demonic or diabolic to Satan rather than any subordinate devil. In
    Medieval times, the theologians posited that there were armies of
    devils, some powerful; others much less so.  Now _if_ we assume, for
    discussion's sake, that a person is truly "possessed" of a devil, it by
    no means follows that the possessor is the big guy; it might be
    something as weak as a minor imp.  Or, it might be that a more powerful
    entity is there, but either it is fighting some resistance or it has a
    perverse sense of humor ,(or it might even be lazy).  It might even be
    that the only ones who show signs of "possession" are those who fight
    the effect and those who don't fight at all seem like "ordinary folk"
    but go about in secret doing things like serial killings.  The area of
    speculation here is nearly boundless.  Of course, that's all
    suppositional, and nothing of the sort may be going on at all.

    >      So, yes, Steve-arino, there are other *possibilities*, puts
    >your moneys down, place your bets, then lead your life wherever 
    >your fortune lies...

    My point was and is that until one knows for certain, it's premature
    to make a flat-out assertion that eliminates all alternatives.  To
    invert my maxim, "Don't let your brains fall out, but keep an open
    mind."

    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    This is just an observation and is in no way meant to reflect on
    anyone, but I watched this and felt the girl was faking. It seemed to
    forced to me. And 2, I noticed that when the "spirit/demon" was doing
    some of it's screaming in tongues, it sounded just like what some of
    the TV evangelists sound like when thay supposedly speak in tongues. 
    
    Phil

Re: .15

Not to cast aspersions on charismatic churches, but, the one time I attended
such a service, and the women two seats away started speaking "in tongue", I
didn't feel like a beneficial spirit was speaking through her.  Just the 
opposite; I became extremely uncomfortable and creepy.  A sensation I had
before in the presence of none to nice spirits.

This doesn't mean that all speaking in tongues is from "evil" sources, but 
neither should it imply that a religion with this is receiving it from a good
source either.  The charismatic religions seem to encourage on opening up to
a spirit, but I'm not sure they take all the precautions needed to insure
contact with good, instead of any random, spirits.

Beth

    re .15 (SCARGO::CONNELL)
    
>                         I noticed that when the "spirit/demon" was doing
>    some of it's screaming in tongues, it sounded just like what some of
>    the TV evangelists sound like when thay supposedly speak in tongues. 
    
    	Do TV evangelists really speak in tongues on TV?  (I don't watch
    them.)
    
    								-mark.

    re .15
    
    I didn't see anything supernatural there either.
    
    mary

    HI,
    
    
    
    I was just wondering if anyone happened to tape this show?  I mean
    being on a Friday night there is the slight chance that someone went
    out (like I did), only they remembered to set up their VCR :-).  I
    would really appreciate borrowing the tape if possible.
    
    
    Thanks,
    
    Kelly

    . 16 Beth, I don't think your casting aspersions on Charismatic
    Churches. I agree with you. THat would be unnerving. I don't see any
    good coming from it from televangelists either. 
    
    .17 Yes some televangelists do "speak in tongues". At least the ones
    I've watched, when they "get all fired up", start dancing around the
    stage yelling out praises to God and in the middle of all this start
    babbling in either tongues or gibberish, depending on ones personel
    viewpoint. This girl appeared to be doing the same thing. The words
    even sounded similar. The voice changes in her just sounded like she
    changed the range and pitch of her voice, not actually spoke in someone
    or something else's voice.
    
    .18 Thank you Mary. Exactly how I felt.
    
    .19 I meant to tape it, but don't have any blank tapes currently sorry.
    
    Phil

    In re: televangelists "speaking in tongues"
    
    This is also known as glossolalia.  I believe that those who
    speak in tongues are primarily the Pentecostals.  I think
    you will find in Acts 2 words to the effect that when the
    Holy Ghost appeared to Jesus' disciples, the disciples began
    to speak in other tongues.  Other Christian theology has
    taught that, once its purpose was served, God withdrew the
    gift.  Some non-Pentecostal fundamentalists believe that
    talking in tongues is false, perhaps inspired by the devil.
    
    Prominent televangelists who have talked in tongues include
    Oral Roberts (particularly Oral Roberts) Jim Bakker, Jimmy
    Swaggart, and Pat Robertson.  
    
    Joel
    

    re: .21 (Joel)
    
         in regards to the group you mention speaking in tongues...
    was that forked tongues, by any chance?
    
    Frederick
    ;-)
    

    re: .22
    
    Well, at least in the case of Mr. Bakker, lately of the latrine
    cleaning squad, we have legal proof of the tongue being
    forked...
    
    Joel
    

    St. Paul wrote that speaking in tongues should be strictly private,
    unless there was interpretation.  In  my limited experience with people
    speaking in tongues, there was not always interpretation.  
    
    My folks once had a book that documented glossolalia all over the
    globe, including several in non-Christian contexts.  The book
    documented at least one instance wherein the ecstatic utterances turned
    out to be Chinese profanity.  (ref. .16).  
    
    I had some personal experience with this.  Speaking in tongues was very
    much "in" in some religious circles in the mid-sixties.  Try as I
    might, I was never able to work up anything more than moving my lips,
    and that was voluntary.  (Some had suggested that if you kind of "prime
    the pump," it'll all work out.)  Even 'though Paul explicitly says that
    these gifts are not for everyone, I really felt like I wasn't with it.  
    
    Outside of pentacostal churches, speaking in tongues usually is very
    divisive in main-line churches.  Not a bad idea to get people thinking,
    perhaps, but not at all pleasant to live through.  
    
    On the other hand, my experiences in this area did challenge me to a
    fundamental commitment to Christ.  For that I am grateful.
    
    DR

    
    There is one person's experience of an exorcism in "People Of The Lie -
    The Hope For Healing Human Evil" by Scott Peck.  This is not the main
    topic in the book, however...it's more about evil and psychology.
    Somewhere in this conference (Do a DIR/TITLE=PECK), I typed in the
    table of contents of this, and his other two books.
    
    Cindy

    
    Having been out of town last week, I am joining this conference a
    little late, but wanted to add my .02. I watched the show, and was
    reakky expecting to be frightened. I wasn't. In the first place, to
    give such an important topic 40 minutes (minus commercial time) was to 
    degrade it to mere "Geraldoism" (if I make coin a phrase). To Roman
    Catholics, and I suspect a lot of other people, possesion is a very
    real and frightening experience. I agree with the folks who question
    the televising of it at all. But having done so, there were a lot of
    questions left unanswered, for instance, WAS this speaking in tongues?
    Did anyone recognize a language? All I heard was a bunch of gibberish.
    
    I also wanted to see demonstrations of the other 3 "qualifiers":
    levitation, clairvoyance, and  mumble (I forget the last one).
    
    Seeing as they had no hesitation in filming the actual exorcism, the
    "fun" part, pardon my humor, was missing.
    
    I believe some sort of possession is possible, I don't really know whoc
    does the possessing; do I believe this was a real one? No.
    
    I think this was a case of multiple personalities, the girl was
    probably told she was possessed and believed it. Having been made
    better, not cured, byt the exorcism is probably a case of the "faith
    healing" discussed in some previous notes where belief is the strongest
    medicine.
    
    Marilyn
      

    
    OOOPS!  That last should have read really not reakky.
    
    
    Sorry,
    
    
    Marilyn

	I happened to see this show while I was randomly tuning
	across the airwaves.  It was a pretty pathetic little
	exercise, actually.

	The girl in question was obviously suffering from some
	very concrete mental disorder.  (It's interesting to
	note that many schizophrenics begin to exhibit symptoms
	at about the time they enter puberty.)  At the end of
	the program, one of the priests involved did a lot of
	hemming and hawing trying to explain why it was that
	the girl didn't really seem to get better until her
	psychiatrist put her on a drug regimen...

	I also found it vaguely amusing to hear the priest say
	that, "...if we didn't tie her down, she'd be flying
	up to the ceiling right now..."  Yeah, and if my shoes
	weren't so heavy, so would I.

	There was nothing in that program to indicate anything
	more than a girl with problems.  Unfortunately, members
	of the clergy decided to use her troubles to validate
	their own faltering belief system.

I have a question regarding why 'levitation' is considered one of the 
indications of possession?  Why would levitation be viewed as a negative?
I attended a healing workshop facilitated by a Catholic priest a couple of
weeks ago.  He mentioned during his lecture a case of a woman who continually
levitated in a local Massachusetts church while Mass was being celebrated.  
His description of her levitating was because she was highly evolved, can't
quote him exactly but it had to do with the Holy Spirit.  He said the church
kept it hushed because they didn't want to make a freak show out of it.

In levitation stories, I've heard from other sources, the subject was always
a highly evolved soul/entity.

Curious,

Ro

RE: .28

>	There was nothing in that program to indicate anything
>	more than a girl with problems.  Unfortunately, members
>	of the clergy decided to use her troubles to validate
>	their own faltering belief system.

    Sounds to me like you are projecing your own belief system on the
    situation.  I do not share the Catholic belief system, but I know
    of no evidence to support the contention that it is "faltering" overall
    and quite a bit to suggest the opposite.  Or are you claiming that
    these particular priests were having a crisis of faith?  If so, on what
    evidence?  That they acted in a way that seems bizarre from the
    viewpoint of a more "secular" anti-supernatural belief system, though
    consistent with their own?

    I do not share their belief system.  I am quite sure that nothing
    supernatural, and probably nothing paranormal, took place.  The
    Catholic church, however, is quite aware of the possability of non-
    supernatural causes of such events.  An exorcism is quite unlikely to
    be done unless there is *some* aspect of the case which the people
    involved have difficulty explaining in conventional terms.  Of course,
    they frequently are not qualified to judge whether or not the events
    can be explained by relatively "subtle" conventional explanations, and
    would always assume paranormal manifestations (if such exist, as I
    believe) to be supernatural in origin.  But I think it is very unlikely
    that this would have taken place unless the priests involved had what
    *they* considered very good reasons to believe that there was something
    "unnatural" invovled.

    I did not see the show, so I do not know what the "hemming and hawing"
    you refered to consisted of.  I do know that the Catholic Church
    accepts that psychiatric help may be needed *as well as the exorcism*
    since a) psychiatric problems may make someone (in their opinion)
    vulnerable to possesion, and b) possesion may trigger latent
    psychiatric problems.  The "proof" of possesion is not irrational
    behavior, but indications of "supernatural" influence.  A successful
    exorcism would be expected to remove the latter, but might or might
    not remove the former.

    Does this lead to a non-falsifiable hypothesis?  Yes, of course it
    does.  But they do not claim that their belief system is falsifiable.
    Nonfalsifiability is a criterion of a "rational" belief system (a
    nonfalsifiable criterion, I might add).  It is a question of faith, and
    faith is nonrational, but need not be irrational.

    ... and cynicism is not rationality either -- it is opposed to it.

				Topher

RE: .29 (Ro)

    As I understand it, the Catholic Church does not view levitation (or
    other "miraculous" abilities) as a direct mark of personal "evolution"
    (that is a rather non-Catholic concept, in fact).  Rather, levitation
    is an indication of supernatural intervention.  That intervention may
    be from a Godly source, in which case the person involved has been
    shown special devine favor.  This may be because of special personal
    "merit", but may also be simply because circumstances were such that
    that person had been selected for a special mission.

    The source might also, however, be anti-Godly/demonic/Satanic.  In
    cases of "possesion" accompanyed by out-and-out blasphemy, and other
    clearly un-Godly behavior the distinction is easy to make.  Things
    get more complicated when the general behavior is not out-and-out
    demented, but supports ideas that the cleric making a judgement
    considers incorrect, or even heretical.  Case in point is Joan of Arc
    with her unseemly dressing up in men's clothing, her declarations of
    common folk theology which were considered incorrect by the Church, and
    her support of one side of a political dispute as *really and truly*
    God's side.

    Traditionally, the Catholic Church (and most Christian groups) rejects
    the concept of "neutral" supernatural agencies.  There are interesting
    philosophical/historical reasons why that concept is rejected, but I'll
    leave that for another note, perhaps.

				Topher

Thanks Topher.  I should have realized that the priest conducting the workshop
wasn't expressing the 'official' RC viewpoint on levitation.  However, his
belief. makes more sense to me in that it gives credit to the person's own 
spirit being 'Godly' enough to cause the levitation.

Ro

    
    
    Hmmm....is the levitation of a human body all that different from the
    levitation of, say, a table?  I have experienced and witnessed the
    levitation and movement of a table....a very heavy one at that. 
    Doesn't this all have to do with telekinesis?  We know so very little
    about the energies that surround everything, including us.  If these
    energies are worked with in certain ways, we would be amazed at what
    could be done.
    
    I would be awed to see a group of people levitate another person, and
    even more so for an individual to levitate themselves, but I think they
    are working with very natural laws that we just don't know much about
    yet.
    
    Carole

    I agree, Carole.

>	I have experienced and witnessed the
>    levitation and movement of a table....a very heavy one at that. 
    
    Remarkable, Carole.  Could you describe your experience in more detail, 
    please ?   Did you initiate this, or someone else ?  I thought it was 
    tough enough to find people who could moves pins and little bits of foil.  
    
    							todd

    
    Hi Toddy!
    
    A few years ago, I participated in a 30 week program for the
    development of mediumship.  This program primarily focused on
    evidential mediumship (i.e. someone in spirit communicating to
    someone in the body through a medium).  Some of the classes
    dealt with physical mediumship, and we had a few practice sessions
    with what is called 'table-tilting'.  There were about 20 people
    involved, including the two teachers of the program.  There were
    5 tables with 4 people to a table.  We experienced some movement
    at the table I was at, but one of the other tables really started
    to move.  In fact, it began moving so fast that the rest of us
    had to get out of the way!  We all made room for it and a few more
    people joined in at the table.  All these people did was to lay
    their hands lightly on the top of the table.  It was very heavy.
    There was no one underneath it.  There was no mechanism underneath
    it.  There was no magnet under the floor.  We videotaped the whole
    session.  It was quite amazing and fun!  The energy in the room
    was very strong and I could feel it.  If you were to put your hands
    out and push at the air, it felt like a very big cushion.
    
    It would be interesting to try another experiment like that again.
    
    Carole

    I also seen a similar version on the Spanish program last week.
    They showed seens from the movie and then the young girl.
    Also they showed another woman dressed in black from head to toe.
    She had a white vail over her head and a huge black wooden cross
    around her neck. The priest dressed like a monk anointed her on
    the head hands and feet. He said some prayers as he walked around her.
    Before this she said she ran like a rabied animal in the streets.
    But now she has found peace in herself. When I saw the young girl
    going thru this I felt it was very much like the movie.
    My question is how much of this could be true and how much is acting?

    I did see the program, I was waiting to have the living daylights
    scared out of me but no such luck!  The girl looked like she had
    multiple personalities....I think if I would have seen her levitate I
    would have beleive it more.

    I think its a case of people wanting physical proof that possession
    exists.  At the end of the day its how strong your belief is  - in anything.
    
    If you have no first-hand experience of it, how can you condone/condemn
    it?
    
    I think the world has lots of unexplained mysterious happenings, some  of
    which Im curious about, some of which I think should be left as it is.
    
    We always question things - why not take things as they are and just
    get on with it?  This world is full of too many doubting thomas's!	
    
    
    Deb

    
    re. 39
    
    >We always question things - why not take things as they are and just
    >get on with it?  This world is full of too many doubting thomas's!
    
    For me, the toughest thing is to discern if something is really
    what it is, as opposed to what other people want me to think it is.
    Most of the time, the something goes into my "not enough info"
    bin.
    
    
    Eva