Unlike the last two, this message really is intended for the List!
I aopologise for (apparently) pressing the worng button and sending to the
list what wass intended for single person.
There is an explanation which lies in the software we use here, Microsoft
Outlook. It is our standard issue, and monks don't have a choice (well, they
are not supposed to), which principle is drawn from the Rule of St Benedict,
the eighth degree of humility, Don't be special).
This egregious software deceives the public. You see a message and it states
clearly that it is from (let us say) Zeus K.Oppenheimer, sent to a
respectable mail-list (which it specifies). Filled with joy at the prompt
and helpful response (a mark of all respectable mail-lists), you innocently
press the icon marked *Reply to Author*, and it displays an inviting blank
form with the sender's name already filled in. And it is quite right - it
was sent by that person, and the header still says so. But ah! the sinister
hand of Microsoft is at work unseen. The message actually came from the
machine that runs the respectable mail-list, and inside the apparatus
secretly sends the reply to the respectable mail-list. And there you are.
When you have all finished laughing at my French, reflect that if we are all
in thrall to Microsoft, we have only ourselves to blame - we buy the stuff.
They would soon go away if we did not. So we are all steeped in what I
believe experts call structural sin. Probably there is a question in St
Thomas about it, ending (no doubt),` quid est inconveniens'.
Sure.
Let us add tothe Litany, *A dominante parvodulci, libera nos Domine*
Anselm Cramer OSB
Indignant, Ampleforth
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|