text:
St Severus of Antioch is one of the great Fathers of the Oriental Orthodox Churches. In the decades after the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD it was he, more than any other theologian, who expressed most forcefully and clearly the Orthodox Christology of the Oriental Orthodox Churches. He grew up in the confused environment of the Church produced by Chalcedon and intermittently exacerbated by imperial persecution of those who rejected the decisions of that council. Yet despite his opposition to Chalcedon he always remained as tolerant and irenic as possible, being willing even to accept the phrase 'in two natures' as long as the union of Divinity and humanity in Christ was confessed. Yet the Eastern Orthodox have accused St Severus of being both a Nestorian and a Eutychian and the latter Eastern Orthodox councils have anathematised him together with St Dioscorus.
The actual teachings of St Severus have become unjustly obscure, both among the Eastern Orthodox and even the Oriental Orthodox, who should value him more. Yet his manifest reliance and dependence on the teaching of St Cyril of Alexandria, and the clarity of his thought, should make him a useful exemplar of the Christology of the Oriental Orthodox. The Christological teachings of the Eastern Orthodox are widely known and published, but in this time of ecumenical dialogue it seems that most of the Oriental Orthodox Christology that Eastern Orthodox learn is derived from second-hand and erroneous accounts that twist and distort what Oriental Orthodox have always believed. The teachings of St Severus, answering many of the same objections as are heard today, are an antidote to such misinformation and promote the dialogue between the Churches.
St Severus was born in Sozopolis in Pisidia in 465 AD. He came from a wealthy family and was sent to Alexandria to study. He continued his studies in Beirut where he came under the influence of a group of Christian students. He began to study the writings of Sts Gregory of Nazianzen and Basil and at some time in this period he was baptised.
After his baptism his outlook became increasingly ascetical and he spent much of his time in Church. Finally, after he had qualified as a lawyer, he decided to become a monk in Jerusalem. Travelling into the desert of Eleutheropolis he sought a more ascetic way of life, but illness and the persuasion of his friends led him to enter the monastery of Romanus. He shared out his property among his brothers, gave his share to the poor and devoted himself to the monastic life near the town of Maiuma.
Severus was already committed to opposing the council of Chalcedon. Maiuma had been the episcopal seat of Peter the Iberian, one of the bishops who had consecrated Timothy Aelurus, and Severus was part of this tradition of opposition. He rejected the Henoticon of Zeno, which was an imperial attempt at conciliation between the pro and anti-Chalcedonian parties, because it dealt with the stumbling block of Chalcedon by ignoring it.
His criticism of Chalcedon was never based on the acceptance in any form of the heresy of Eutyches. Indeed in his work, Philalethes, or the Lover of Truth, he explained that,
Had it confessed hypostatic union, the Council would have confessed also 'one incarnate nature of God the Word', and would not have defined that the one Christ is 'in two natures' thereby dissolving the union.
Severus was sent to Constantinople and wrote his first major work there in 508 AD. While in the capital he became known to the Emperor Anastasius who had greater sympathy with the anti-Chalcedonians than with the pro-Chalcedonians led by Patriarch Macedonius. In 511 Patriarch Macedonius was replaced by Timothy, and then in 512, after a synod assembled by the Emperor in Sidon, the Patriarch Flavian was ejected because he would not anathematise Chalcedon and Severus was consecrated Patriarch in his place.
In his enthronement address Severus affirmed Nicaea, Constantinople and Ephesus. He also affirmed the Henoticon of Zeno as an Orthodox document, but he also explicity anathematised Chalcedon, the Tome of Leo, Nestorius and Eutyches, Diodore and Theodore of Tarsus. In 514 his Synod anathematised Chalcedon and the Tome while explaining the Henoticon as annulling Chalcedon.
All of this activity gives the lie to the prevalent opinion that in 451 AD the Oriental Orthodox went quietly into exile and schism. Here we see that the Church was alive with those who opposed Chalcedon, and it was those who supported it who found themselves on the defensive.
Severus continued his ascetic manner of life even as Patriarch. He sent away the many cooks from the episcopal residence and demolished the baths that previous bishops had built. In his homilies in the cathedral he constantly warned his people against attending the races and theatres.
But in 518 AD Emperor Anastasius died and the new emperor Justin immediately ordered the arrest and punishment of Patriarch Severus. He managed to escape to Egypt with some of his bishops while other anti-Chalcedonians were sent into a difficult exile. While in Egypt, moving from monastery to monastery, avoiding his enemies, he wrote some of his most important works and corresponded widely and continuously.
In 530 AD the emperor Justinian eased the persecution which the anti-Chalcedonians had been suffering. In 532 AD he even attempted to reconcile the two parties in the Church by calling a conference in Constantinople. Finally, in 534 AD Anthimus, an anti-Chalcedonian, became Patriarch of Constantinope and Theodosius, another anti-Chalcedonian and friend of Severus, became Patriarch of Alexandria. Once more it seemed that the anti-Chalcedonian movement might gain the ascendancy in the Church. This so alarmed the pro-Chalcedonians that they exercised all of their diplomatic skills to bring the opinion of Agapetus of Rome to bear on the emperor. The Emperor Justinian was engaged in efforts to recapture Rome and the West and sacrificed Anthimus for the pro-Chalcedonian Menas. In a synod held in Constantinople in 536 AD Severus and his colleagues were condemned. He was accused of being both a Nestorian and a Eutychian, his books were ordered to be burned and he was sentenced to be banished. He managed to escape from Constantinople with the help of the Empress Theodora and he returned to Egypt. There after a light illness he fell asleep. He was 73 years old.
In the period 518-520 AD Severus engaged in a correspondence with a certain Sergius. This Sergius had been attempting to expound the Orthodox teaching about the Incarnation of Christ, but had been criticised by his local synod because he had spoken without discretion. In three letters that were sent by Severus to Sergius we can find much of the Christology of Severus presented in just such an explanatory manner as may be useful today. These letters have been recently translated and published by Dr Iain Torrance, and are well worth study. Since they are so easily obtained they will now be used as the basis for this examination of the teaching of St Severus. This essay is only an introduction to the Christology of St Severus and deliberately restricts itself to this one work, published as Christology After Chalcedon (Iain Torrance, The Canterbury Press, Norwich, 1988). It is not too difficult to acquire and in a small space describes much of the teaching of St Severus, both against the Nestorians and the Eutychians.
Sergius' problem was that in opposing the Nestorian position that in Christ the Divinity and humanity were naturally separate and united only in a personal manner, he strayed too far from the truth and failed to expound the Orthodox teaching. This Sergius taught that the opposite of a natural disunity was a simple unity in which there could only be one nature, which Sergius took in the sense of ousia or essence, and therefore created a new Christ nature which was neither essentially human or Divine. In most modern Christian's eyes this is the teaching of the Oriental Orthodox Churches. We are assumed to confess in one nature a simple and confused unity which destroys the distinction between humanity and Divinity. Severus' opposition of Sergius will clearly illustrate the fundamental difference between the 'one nature' of Sergius and the 'one incarnate nature' of Cyril and Severus.
Even a cursory glance at Severus' letters makes it abundantly clear that Severus was dependent on the thoughts and teachings of Cyril of Alexandria. In the three relatively short letters to Sergius we find more than 60 quotations from St Cyril. Many more than any other Father. Whenever Severus wants to make a point he will quote from Cyril. What does this tell us? Firstly, that Severus considered himself to be a disciple of Cyril of Alexandria. Thus we should not read into any of his teachings an anti-Cyrilline meaning which is not justified by his complete commitment to a Cyrilline Christology. Secondly, that the writings of Severus should be read in continuity with those of Cyril and not as though they taught something different. Any obscure points in the teaching of Severus should be explained by the teaching of Cyril and not assumed to be at odds with it.
There are a number of Christological points which need to be examined in the writings of Severus. It is important to consider the accusation that he taught both Nestorianism and Eutychianism. How could this be so? If Nestorianism teaches the separation of the natures in Christ and Eutychianism the confusion, then how could Severus possibly be guilty of teaching both heresies? Such an understanding, though unjustified, may have arisen among his opponents because of the phrase 'of two natures' which is key to the Oriental Orthodox Christology. Among the Oriental Orthodox it describes both the continuing distinction between the Divinity and humanity of Christ, whilst confessing the real and perfect union between them. In the hands of those who sought Severus punishment and exile it was twisted to stand for a pre-existent humanity and Divinity coming together in a confused unity, therefore a perceived Nestorianism and Eutychianism. Thus we need to examine carefully the teaching of Severus about the humanity and Divinity of Christ, as well as the union between them.
Let us first consider the accusation of Eutychianism. What can be found in these letters of Severus to refute such a charge? Almost immediately as the first letter begins, Severus writes to Sergius:
Know, therefore, that professing the natural particularity of the natures from which there is the One Christ is not just recently determined by us.
Here Severus indicates that Sergius' error lay in supposing that union must mean the extinction of each natures particular existence. More than that, Severus places himself within the Orthodox tradition which had confessed the continuity of the natures in Christ. He continues this passage immediately with a substantial and important quotation from Cyril:
For even if the Only-Begotten Son of God, incarnate and inhominate, is said by us to be one, he is not confused because of this, as he seems to those people, nor has the nature of the Word passed over into the nature of the flesh, nor indeed has the nature of the flesh passed into that which is his, but while each one of them continues together in the particularity that belongs to the nature, and is thought of in accordance with the account which has just been given by us, the inexpressible and ineffable union shows us one nature of the son, but as I have said, incarnate.
The quotation from Cyril explains the meaning of the sentence from Severus. This passage shows us that Severus is dependent on Cyril for his Christology and that when he speaks of the particularity of the natures in Christ he is summarising the quotation which he then provides from Cyril. This in turn teaches that the humanity of Christ continues to be humanity and the Divinity of Christ continues to be Divinity. Therefore the concept of 'one incarnate nature' cannot and should not, in Cyril or in Severus, be taken to stand for the extinction or confusion of either the humanity or Divinity.
Severus makes this absolutely explicit by stating:
When the Doctor has confessed one nature of God the Word, who is incarnate, he says that each of them continues together and is understood in the particularity that belongs to the nature.
This makes clear that Severus teaches that the one nature of God the Word incarnate should be understood as allowing the two natures to continue to exist in the union of natures and to continue to preserve their distinctions and characteristics. There is no sense in which he teaches a Eutychian confusion of the humanity and Divinity.
Another quotation from Cyril is provided to illustrate what Severus means by the continuing distinctions of the humanity and Divinity of Christ:
Therefore let us recognise that even if the body which was born at Bethlehem is not the same, that is, as far as natural quality is concerned, as the Word which is from God and the Father, yet nevertheless it became his, and did not belong to another man beside the Son. But the Word incarnate is to be considered one Son and Christ and Lord.
This is a key quotation because it expresses both Severus' confession of the continuing distinction and difference between the humanity born at Bethlehem and the eternal and divine Word, as well as his commitment to a union which makes one Christ without a confusion of these natures. The body born at Bethlehem was never the body of a man beside the Word or with the Word. From the moment of conception this humanity was the humanity of the Word, distinct from the divinity but never separated or divided, therefore, without suffering any change the humanity and the divinity are made one in the incarnation.
Severus, in his own words, writes to Sergius that:
..particularity implies the otherness of natures of those things which have come together in union, and the difference lies in natural quality. For the one is uncreated, but the other created....Nevertheless, while this difference and the particularity of the natures, from which comes the one Christ, still remains without confusion, it is said that the Word of Life was both seen and touched.
How could it be expressed any clearer that Severus did not even conceive of the humanity and Divinity of Christ being confused in any way. The 'difference...remains without confusion', he confesses. Exactly the same teaching as steadfastly maintained by Cyril before him, and not at all to be compared with the teaching of Eutyches, however that is described. The union is confessed with the teaching that the Divine Word was seen and touched by the Apostles, but it is clear that this union does not confuse the continuing distinction between the humanity and Divinity.
Indeed Severus is well aware of the heresy of those who confused the natures in Christ. He writes to Sergius of their madness and he refutes any sense in which his teaching of the union of the humanity and Divinity in Christ could be compared with the confusion of natures of the 'synousiasts'. Nor does he feel the need, as they have, to 'cure evil with evil', that is the evil of Nestorianism with the evil of Eutychianism.
To make this absolutely clear Severus quotes again from Cyril, who writes in his reply to a critic:
There is no share in any blame that one should recognise, for example, that the flesh is one thing in its own nature, apart from the Word which sprang from God and the Father, and that the Only-Begotten is another again, with respect to his own nature. Nevertheless to recognise these things is not to divide the natures after the union.
These words should be taken as though written by Severus himself. He is quoting them with complete agreement. There is no blame, he says in Cyril's words, there is no blame associated with recognising that in Christ the humanity and Divinity are different things. The flesh is one thing, according to nature, the Divinity another, according to nature. Here is a clear expression of the Christology of the Oriental Orthodox. The recognition of the difference between the humanity and Divinity of Christ in no wise detracts from the confession of the true and perfect union of these natures. Both of these Christological facts are true. The humanity and Divinity retain their integrity, their distinctions, but the union of them drives out division. There is no room for Nestorianism or Eutychianism.
Severus proceeds to explain rather more about how he conceives of the union taking place:
Let us make an enquiry of the divinity and humanity. They are not only different in everything but they are removed from each other and distinct as well. But when the union is professed from the two of them, the difference, again, in the quality of the natures from which there is the One Christ is not supressed, but in conjunction by hypostasis division is driven out.
Here is the key to understanding Oriental Orthodox Christology: the difference remains, division is driven out and the union takes place hypostatically. No-one should allow any interpretation of the Christology of the Oriental Orthodox which mutilates this clear and straight-forward definition. If someone suggests that a confusion of natures is taught, then they are mistaken. It is clear that Severus, and all of us with him, confess the continuing difference of these natures. If someone suggests that we teach that these natures have their own independent existence then they are mistaken. It is clear that Severus, and all of us with him, confess a real and perfect union in which there is no division. And if others should suggest that we teach a mixture or confusion of essences or ousia then they are again mistaken, because Severus, and all of us with him confess a hypostatic union.
But this teaching should not be understood as something new, or something that originated after Chalcedon had confused the unity of the Church. Severus indicates his continuity and agreement with Cyril by quoting immediately from him:
I too allow that there is a great difference or distinction between humanity and Divinity. For these things which were named are seen to be other, according to the mode of how they are, and they are not like each other in anything. But when the mystery which is in Christ has come for us into the middle, the principle of union does not ignore the difference but it removes the division; not because it confuses with each other or mixes the natures, but because the Word of God has shared in flesh and blood, thus again the Son too is understood and named as One.
Oriental Orthodox should not be afraid to admit the real and absolute difference between humanity and Divinity. Not only is this the teaching of Severus, but it is the teaching of Cyril of Alexandria. The mystery of the incarnation is that in the union of humanity and Divinity the difference between these natures remains while division is driven out. Here in this quotation it is also clear that Severus and Cyril allow no confusion of these natures, or a mixture. The union is not like that. It is a real and perfect union that preserves the real difference between the humanity and Divinity.
So where does Severus dispute with Nestorius and those who divide Christ? It is certainly not in the recognition of the continuing difference between the humanity and Divinity. Rather, as Severus explains:
We confess the difference and the particularity and the otherness of the natures from which Christ is, for we do not quarrel about names, but we confess the particularity which lies in natural quality, and not that which will be set in parts, each one existing independently.
So Severus makes clear that the argument with the supporters of Nestorius lies not in naming the natures of humanity and Divinity, nor in confessing their continuing difference and otherness. The argument lies in whether or not the union which is taught allows each nature to have its own seperate and independent existence, or whether, as Cyril of Alexandria teaches, we confess a union in which these real and different natures are united such that Christ is One, even as the Nicene Creed professes.
It should be clear by now that the Oriental Orthodox, through the teaching of Severus and Cyril before him, and indeed through many other Fathers, teach as a fundamental Christological fact that the natures are different and retain this difference even in their perfect union.
Once again Severus is echoing Cyril's own words, since he had written years before:
It is not right that we should make a division into an independent diversity, so that they should become separate and apart from each other; rather we ought to bring them together to undivided union. For the Word became flesh, according to the words of John.
This independent diversity is what we should reject. Not the fact of the diversity of the natures, the humanity and Divinity, which are completely other and different from each other. The heart of our Christology, indeed of our Orthodox Christology, is that these two distinct and different natures have been united in a union that has no division even whilst their is no confusion.
We do not refuse to confess the difference, God forbid! But we flee from this, that we should divide the one Christ in a duality of natures after the union. For if he is divided, the properties of each one of the natures are divided at the same time with him, and what is its own will cling to each one of them. But when a hypostatic union is professed, of which the fulfilment is that from two there is one Christ without confusion, one person, one hypostasis, one nature belonging to the Word incarnate.
What Severus, and Cyril, strive so hard to prevent is a division of Christ such that there is a human and a God. This is the essence of Nestorianism. In this passage Severus shows the strength of his feeling that we must absolutely confess that the humanity and Divinity of Christ are different things. There is no room for a Eutychian confusion of humanity and Divinity. This recognition of the difference of the nature is not what we object to. What we object to is creating a duality of natures, which does not mean the destruction of the difference between them, rather it means setting up two independent centres of existence, the humanity and the Divinity, and these independent centres of existence destroy the union. It is a hypostatic union that ensures the real union of these different natures. This passage makes clear that firstly, a hypostatic union does not introduce confusion between the humanity and the Divinity; secondly, that 'one nature belonging to the Word incarnate' does not mean either a confused divine/human nature nor does it mean that the humanity is swallowed up by the Divinity; thirdly, the passage makes plain that the union is one in which the different natures have their differences preserved but within one concrete existence, that of the Incarnate Christ, and not preserved independently as the Son of God and a man united in some external manner. The 'duality of natures' which is rejected is not the reality of the humanity and Divinity, but a division between them which destroys the union and which makes One Christ of the two without confusion.
It was Cyril, as Severus quotes, who had said that:
The properties of the Word became properties of manhood, and those of manhood, properties of the Word. For thus one Christ and Son and Lord is understood.
This is Cyril speaking, Cyril the great Orthodox christologian. He can hardly be accused of confusing the natures of humanity and Divinity, nor of failing to confess the continuing distinction between them. Yet he describes here how in the union of natures in Christ there is a communication of properties, without confusion, so that we may truly say that God was seen and heard and touched, that God suffered and died. Thus when Christ walked on the water this was neither a human action, since it is not human to walk on water, nor was it divine, since it is not of God to walk, but it is an evidence of the union of humanity and Divinity, without confusion such that we see always One Christ and not God and a man with him.
What could Severus object to in the teaching of those who supported Chalcedon? It was not that they confessed the reality and difference between the humanity and divinity. It was not that they refused to confuse the natures in Christ. But Severus did impress upon both Sergius in his letters to him, and to his own followers that:
When we anathematise those who say Emmanuel has two natures after the union, and speak of the activities and properties of these, we are not saying this as subjecting to anathema the fact of, or naming, natures, or activities, or properties, but speaking of two natures after the union, and because consequently those natures...are divided completely and in everything.
We should object, then, with Severus, to those who divide Christ and not those who name the natures of which Christ is. There is no error in stating that Christ is of humanity and divinity, and that in union these differences persist. But there is error in setting up a humanity and a divinity with their own separate activities as though there were Christ the man and the Word of God, each perfect in a simple humanity or divinity and only united in some external manner. Following Severus' argument we see that it is not the saying that Emmanuel has two natures which is condemned, but saying that he has these two natures and then describing their activities separately, as though there was God the Word acting as God in heaven and Christ the man acting as man on earth. Severus allows the naming of the natures. We can and must confess that Christ is human and divine, but we must not allow this Orthodox confession to be perverted such that we describe a man and the Word of God seperately. It is God the Word who is this man Jesus.
We also recognise a variety of utterances: for some are proper to God, while others are human, but one Word incarnate spoke both the former and the latter.
This is a further explication of the Orthodox Christology of the Oriental Orthodox Churches. This simple sentence describes the continuing difference of the natures of which Christ is, whilst confessing that the union is such that the human and Divine utterances alike belong to God the Word. Not that the human utterances become mixed or confused, but they belong to God and are of God the Word even though they are uttered by His humanity. The divinity belongs to God the Word from eternity because it is his own nature. The humanity has become truly and completely his own in the incarnation and because of His love for us, and therefore we may truly say that God the Word was seen, and heard and touched. Yet without the confusion or mixture of the divinity which was his from eternity and the humanity which he united to himself in time.
This is what Severus means when he says:
For how will anyone divide walking upon the water? For to run upon the sea is foreign to the human nature, but it is not proper to the divine nature to use bodily feet. Therefore that action is of the incarnate Word, to whom belongs at the same time divine character and human, indivisibly.
This is why Severus criticises those who try to divide up the activities of Christ as though they belonged to the different natures separately and not to the incarnate Word, who is of humanity and divinity unconfusedly. There is no error in understanding that in his humanity Christ acts humanly, that speaking and eating and all such things are of humanity, and are not divine. But in the union of humanity and divinity in Christ, all of these things belong to God the Word who acts divinely in union with his humanity. The error that Severus opposes is the setting up of two seperate centres of activity such that there is a man with God rather than God incarnate.
He who confesses one nature incarnate of God the Word, and teaches an unconfused union, does not deny awareness of the difference and particularity which lies in natural quality of the the natures from which there is the one Christ.
Surely Severus has shown clearly enough that there is not one iota of sympathy in his teaching for those who either deny the reality of the humanity and divinity in Christ. Nor is there any sense in which he allows these perfect, real and complete natures to suffer diminuition, confusion or mixture. Surely it is clear that it is the firm and decided teaching of the Oriental Orthodox Churches that the natures of humanity and divinity have a real, perfect, unconfused and continuing existence in union in the one hypostasis of the Word of God. That these natures in union mean that God the Word is truly incarnate, that he is really fully God and fully man.
It has often been presented as though opposition to the council of Chalcedon, and to the Tome of Leo, must of necessity be caused by some heretical impulse that confuses the natures of which Christ is, or dissolves the humanity in the Divinity, or teaches a heavenly humanity that is fundamentally not consubstantial with us. But the Fathers of the Oriental Orthodox Churches have never wandered from the faith of St Cyril or St Athanasius, and have always understood that if Christ were not fully God He would have no power to save us, and if He were not fully man then it would not be man who was saved. When Severus opposed Chalcedon and Leo it was because he believed them to have failed to adequately safeguard the Orthodox Christology of St Cyril and St Athanasius, not at all because he wished to introduce some christological novelty.
For instance, Severus criticises the Tome of Leo, not because Leo of Rome had sought to counter the errors of Eutyches, but because he believed that it contained itself some christological defects. After discussing the union of Divinity and humanity in Christ he speaks thus:
It is possible to see that those things which are contained in the Tome of Leo go clearly against these things, and I quote them:
'For each one of the forms does what belongs to it. The Word doing what belongs to the Word, and the body fulfilling those things which belong to the body, and the one of them is radiant with wonders, but the other falls under insults.'
Now it cannot be said that Severus failed to discern and distinguish the real difference between the humanity and Divinity of Christ. Neither did he ever fail to confess the reality and perfection of these natures in Christ. Therefore if he condemns this passage in the Tome it is not because he himself teaches heresy. In the eyes of Severus, his colleagues, his followers, and those before and after him this passage seemed to teach that the reality of the humanity and Divinity of Christ had their own centres of existence. The Word is set in parallel with the flesh, as though the Word was one centre and the flesh another. This passage seemed to be presenting a doctrine too much like the Nestorian Word and a man with Him.
Whether or not Leo meant to teach this is another question. But it is a fact that the Oriental Orthodox of the 5th and 6th centuries certainly believed that Leo was teaching exactly such a thing. Indeed the position was made more complicated by the agreement of Nestorius with the teaching of the Tome, and later by the celebration of a feast of Nestorius by some of those bishops who had welcomed the Tome at Chalcedon. It looked to many people as though all of this was of a piece and was nothing more than the propagation of Nestorianism by other means, and under the pretence of a respect for St Cyril.
Severus described his opinion of this passage from Leo in the following words,
For if each form or nature does those things which are its own, those things are of a bastard partnership and of a relationship of friendship, such as a master's taking on himself the things which are performed by a servant, or vice-versa, a servant's being glorified with the outstanding possessions of a master, while those things which are not properties of human nature are ascribed to him out of a loving friendship. For he is a man clad with God, who in this way makes use of a power which is not his own.
The question in Severus' mind is not so much how may we divide the activities into human ones, Divine ones, and others which are of a mixed quality, since although he recognises the natural quality of humanity and Divinity he also confesses that all of the activities of Christ are always in reality both human and Divine. Not a mixture at all but the activities, whether human or Divine, belong always to the incarnate Word. He asks 'who' is doing these things?, 'who' do they belong to? and finds the categorisation of activities by Leo, and then even more the owning of each activity being described in the two centres of humanity and Divinity, to tend dangerously towards the division of Christ. The scriptures, and the Orthodox Fathers, taught that Christ, the Divine Word, participated in humanity. His humanity belongs to Him through His incarnation. The activities of His humanity, while being perfectly human, nevertheless belong to the Divine Word who has become incarnate. This sense of ownership, of participation, is missing in Leo's rather clinical and abstract division of activities, honour and insult. If the humanity in isolation suffers the insult then it becomes harder to understand how, in Leo's thought, we may say that God suffers.
This is not a criticism of Leo's Tome, which has had many defenders over the last 1400 years, but in relation to the Orthodox Christology of Severus it is merely an attempt to show that in this point, as in many others that Severus made against Leo's Tome and Chalcedon, the desire was not to promote any Eutychian heresy, but rather to counter a perceived Nestorianism.
Severus not only taught against the Synousiast or Eutychian heresy and the perceived Nestorianism of Leo and the Chalcedonians. He taught positively about the union of natures in Christ, and this element of his Christology should also be briefly examined. Severus' teaching about the union of natures in Christ remains as firmly based on the Christology of St Cyril as the rest of his teaching. Thus he quotes Cyril,
'When the mystery of Christ is brought into the middle for us, the principle of the union on the one hand recognises difference, but on the other hand rejects division, while neither confusing nor mixing the natures with each other. But with the Word of God becoming a partaker of flesh and blood, one Son is understood and named in this way as well.'
Once more we must understand that the union is of a type that recognises the difference between those elements of which it is constituted. But it is also a union that prohibits division. This rejection of division is not caused by a confusion or mixture of the natures, since this would be a failure to recognise the continuing difference. There is a continuing and dynamic interplay between these two features of the union. Continuing difference on the one hand and a rejection of division on the other. For many of the opponents of Severus and the Oriental Orthodox this first aspect was as far as they read in St Cyril's own words. And in failing to read carefully they understood only that St Cyril taught a continuing difference, and thus claimed him as a champion of their own position. But they also exposed their teaching, as far as Severus was concerned, to the criticism that they fundamentally failed to understand the union and merely expressed the continuing perfection of humanity and Divinity without really teaching the union at all as St Cyril understood it. From Severus' point of view there was little difference between the avowed Nestorianism of Theodore, Diodore, Theodoret and Nestorius, and the neo-Nestorianism of those who rejected the Cyrilline theology of 'one incarnate nature of the Word'.
St Cyril continues, and Severus is also most insistent, that it is through the Word of God becoming a partaker of flesh and blood that we see the one Son. The humanity of Christ is thus shown to be not merely something that he has acquired or which he owns, but something in and through which the Divine Son of God participates in human existence. He has become man without change or diminuition of his Divinity, not merely associated himself with humanity in some way.
The means by which this real, complete and perfect union of humanity and Divinity has taken place, without change, confusion , separation or division, is, in the words of St Cyril, quoted once more by Severus:
'..completely inexpressible and not known by any man who lives, but to God who alone knows everything'.
Nevertheless, Severus agrees with St Cyril that:
'The fact of union is accomplished in many ways. For example, when men are divided in affection and opinion and are thinking at variance with each other, they are said to be united through reconciliation of affection as they remove their differences out of the centre. Again for example, we say that those things which cleave to each other or come together in different ways, whether by juxtaposition or mingling or mixture, are united. Therefore when we say that the Word of God was united to our nature, the mode of union is recognised to be above human comprehension for it is not like one of those ways which were mentioned.'
So we learn that Severus, and the Oriental Orthodox, do not teach that the union of humanity and Divinity in Christ are united in any of these ways. We find an explicit rejection of juxtaposition, mingling or mixture, but a confession of an incomprehensible to man union which removes division while preserving distinctions, such that the one Christ is both truly and perfectly man, truly and perfectly God, without confusion or change damaging either.
Severus writes thus against John the Grammarian,
Christ is known to be one from both, which came together into a natural union. He is one prosopon, one hypostasis and one nature (physis) of the Word incarnate, in the same way as man is one, who is made up of body and soul. He is one not by a harmonious association of two persons. That which operates is one, namely God the Word incarnate: He performs the things that befit God as well as the things that befit man, the flesh not being alien to the God-befitting operation. The Word did not work the Divine miracles without being incarnate, neither was the Word external to bodily and human operations and sufferings. For he was incarnate. He who in His nature was without body, became in the dispensation with body, having united to Himself in His Person flesh possessing a rational soul. Therefore in His flesh, which is subject to suffering, He is said to have suffered, ascribing to Himself the passions of the flesh which He united to Himself naturally.
Severus is clear that the union is of two different elements, the pre-existent divinity and the humanity, and Christ is one reality from two real elements, neither of which is lost or confused in the union. But his stress is always that we see Christ as one incarnate Person, so that even though he suffers in His flesh, nevertheless it is God who suffers because it is the flesh of God. For Severus the reality of the incarnation is completely lost if the humanity and Divinity are not real, and are not really united. And if this quotation sound as though Severus might be allowing that the divinity suffers in some sense, then we should heed his message to Julian, who taught that the humanity of Christ was always impassible,
God the Word became incarnate and was made man by uniting to Himself in His Person flesh possessing a rational soul. Therefore, when He endured in reality undeserved suffering of body and soul in the body which was prone to suffer, He continued to be without suffering in the Godhead. So it was not like us who, without wanting to, suffer as men, that He endured passions, but of His own free choice. And again, it is not that He did not suffer, but that He accepted in a real way, without sin, the suffering of humanity.
Severus is therefore absolutely committed to the reality of the humanity in Christ, united without division or confusion to the divinity, such that there is One Christ. Indeed Severus criticises the Eutychian Sergius, with whom he corresponded, for suggesting that allowing the reality of the humanity and Divinity is necessarily the same as confessing a Nestorian juxtaposition.
'How can you charge this inexpressible and truly divine union which the Word of God has miraculously accomplished, with being that union taught by Nestorius which is a conjunction by relationship, and believe that we are required to speak of two natures unless we confess, as you say, that at one time Christ had one ousia? But this is nothing other than a real confusion of ousia....For you think it is impossible to say that he is one unless he changes into one ousia, even when he is made up from two things of a different kind.'
Yet we find that Oriental Orthodox are continually being accused of reducing Christ to one ousia, either the Divine or some mixture of humanity and Divinity. But here Severus refuses to accept that his teaching requires or contains any such reduction. This is due, primarily to the failure of the Eastern Orthodox, and Western Christianity generally, to appreciate that oneness, or union, comes about in different ways, and that to speak of 'one incarnate nature' is not at all to confess one simple nature which must be either human, Divine, or a confusion. St Cyril is quoted by Severus, from his second letter to Succensus,
'For it is not the case that "one" is truly predicated only of things which are simple in nature, but it may also be predicated of those which have come together in composition, an example being the situation of man, composed from soul and body...Therefore those who say that, if the Word incarnate is one nature it follows in everything and in every respect that there will be confusion and mixture, as if the nature of man were decreased and stolen away, speak needlessly, for it is not decreased, nor as they say, stolen away. For it suffices for the complete demonstration of the fact that the Word became man to say that he was incarnate.'
It is something of a mystery that were many Eastern Orthodox to be presented with the preceding paragraph, describing the union of natures in Christ as a 'composition', without attribution to St Cyril, it would be rejected as heretical and Eutychian. Indeed it has been the case that ordinary Eastern Orthodox, when presented by such texts, have declared St Cyril to be merely one father among many whose teachings have no particular weight. Yet this passage completely describes Oriental Orthodox Christology. The union is not a mixture, nor is it simply an external personal union, but it is a composition such that the concrete reality of the incarnate Christ is human and Divine, even while the constituents of that reality remain perfect and different.
But it is not the Divine nature of the Word which is composite. The Divinity remains divinity and the Godhead has not become a quarternity with four hypostases. It is the hypostasis of the Word which is composite, composed in the incarnation of perfect and unconfused human and Divine reality and being. Thus we speak, with St Cyril and St Severus, not of 'one nature or hypostasis of the Word', as though it was made up of simple humanity, Divinity or a mixture, but of 'one incarnate hypostasis of the Word' since it is because of and in the incarnation that the one Christ is both human and Divine.
Thus St Cyril is quoted again and again from a variety of sources,
'It is not the case that in everything and from every respect only what is simple and of one type is called "one", but also those compounded from two or from many things of different types.'
'In his own will he became man, and without damage in any way he preserved the glory of his nature unchanged in himself, but took up manhood according to the economy. And he is understood one Son from two, a divine and human nature, which have run and come together to one, inexpressibly and in explicably composed to union, and in such a way that cannot be understood.'
It is clear that when St Cyril speaks of one nature he is not speaking of one essence or ousia. Indeed in later times the Oriental Orthodox always used St Cyril's phrase 'one incarnate nature of the Word' with the addition 'or hypostasis' so that it was clear that they were describing one concrete reality, Christ who is both human and Divine by composition, rather than describing the underlying substance of humanity or divinity which remain what they always have been. 'One incarnate nature' says that this Christ is both human and Divine, it does not say that humanity and Divinity have been confused so as to become some third 'Christ nature'.
Therefore St Severus rejects the teaching that Christ is two natures, not because he does not believe that Christ is perfectly human and perfectly Divine, indeed it must be clear that he believes in these perfections completely. But for him, and for the Oriental Orthodox, nature means, in many contexts, more than 'underlying substance or essence' and means a concrete and independent example of such an underlying essence. Indeed Oriental Orthodox are not happy with the idea that an ousia or essence can ever exist except as a nature, or concrete reality. It is not humanity that is harmed if I fall over, but this human, this concrete example of the human ousia. Thus Christ is 'one incarnate nature', one reality, but composite. He is 'of' or 'from' both humanity and Divinity, in the sense that these are the underlying substances of which the one reality is unconfusedly composed, but in the ears of St Cyril and St Severus, 'in two natures', without further explanation, sounds dangerously as though it confesses two independent realities, each existing separately, and is thus a variety of Nestorianism.
He explains,
'For the Word himself, who had existence before the ages and is forever together with the Father, and is seen in his own hypostasis and is simple in ousia, became composite in the economy, and that word "incarnate" ensures that it is understood that the flesh endowed with a reasonable soul existed in relationship to the Word himself, and was not independently completed in its own hypostasis.
Thus, 'one incarnate nature' stands for the Divine Word with complete and perfect humanity united to him as his own humanity, and not for a new type of substance that is neither human nor Divine.
Since the Christology of the Oriental Orthodox is so manifestly Cyrilline and in accordance with the Fathers one wonders why there is such a failure to understand these things on the part of those who have separated themselves from us. Yet the Oriental Orthodox Churches have suffered centuries of misunderstanding and abuse. Even today there are many Christians whose aim is to highlight as widely as possible our supposed heresies. Publications have been produced with titles such as 'The Errors of the Monophysite Heretics', and websites exist to promote a false explanation of our Christology. Almost every encyclopaedia propogates such errors and includes throw away lines which suggest that we teach the humanity of Christ was dissolved or swallowed up in his divinity.
His Holiness Pope Shenouda III has been criticised by some Eastern Orthodox, who feel they have made some great discovery by reporting him as stating that the body of Christ is a Divine body. They fail completely to understand, firstly that His Holiness is not at all ignorant of theology, and does not speak what he does not mean. Secondly, and even more importantly, they show how far from the teaching and witness of St Cyril some have strayed, because St Cyril himself is quoted by St Severus as teaching,
'Therefore we say that the body of Christ is divine because it is the body of God, and is brilliant with inexpressible glory, incorruptible, holy and life-giving. But that it was changed into the nature of divinity, no-one of the holy Fathers thought or said, nor do we affirm this.'
This failure illustrates the historic weakness of some Christologies, which fail to answer satisfactorily the question, 'whose is this flesh?', and satisfy themselves with a cataloguing and division of human and divine elements and behaviours. Yet the question is key to the Christology of St Cyril, St Severus, and the Oriental Orthodox.
St Cyril writes,
'Therefore let us acknowledge that the body which was born at Bethlehem, even if it is not the same - I mean in natural quality - with the Word which is from the Father, yet it became his, and not of some other son beside him. But one Son and Christ and Lord is understood even when the Word became incarnate.'
This is the heart of Oriental Orthodox Christology. The humanity of Christ is not the same as his divinity, nor does it ever cease to be completely other than his divinity. But in the incarnation, and because of his love and the exercise of his will it has become truly his own humanity.
Again, in his writings against John the Grammarian, St Severus takes plain to make clear that while the humanity is not at any time apart from the divinity, nevertheless it is a real flesh, with the properties of humanity, and Christ is called Emmanuel because of the reality of His humanity, and because He is truly God with us, unchangeably, unconfusedly.
Before the union and the incarnation, the Word was simple, not incarnate, nor composite. But when he mercifully willed in the dispensation to become man unchangeably along with being what He was, then He was called Christ and Emmanuel – the name being taken from the act – and He became one with us, by reason of the fact that He united to Himself in His Person (hypostasis) flesh which was of the same substance with us and which was animated with a rational and intelligent soul.
The flesh did not come into being before, nor had it been formed already; but in the union with Him, it came into being inexplicably, so that conception, growth, gradual development and birth might be of the incarnate Word. On account of the essential union of the flesh, for which it is natural to be conceived and formed, to grow and be born, though He showed it to be beyond the laws of nature because it happened from the Virgin…and from the Holy Spirit…he who calls Him Christ after the union most certainly signifies Him.
In conclusion, the Christology of St Severus is in every respect in accord with that of St Cyril. It is truly, deeply and completely Orthodox in the sense that it expresses perfectly the Christology of the Fathers of the Holy Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople and Ephesus. There is not one iota of justification for the anathemas historically raised against him by the Byzantine Orthodox, and these anathemas can only have been issued by those who had hardly read anything of his teachings. The Christology of the Oriental Orthodox Churches stands with St Severus and St Cyril in utterly repudiating any teaching in which the distinctions of the natures of divinity and humanity cease to exist in the incarnation, or any teaching which damages the complete and perfect reality of the humanity and divinity of which Christ is. But neither should we cease to steadfastly confess that in the incarnation, and for our salvation, the Word of God has deigned to unite, in a manner past understanding, humanity with his divinity such that even as there is no confusion or mixture, equally there is no division or separation, but we see 'One Christ' and 'One Lord' as the creed confesses. This is the meaning of 'one incarnate nature of the Word', and this must continue to be the heart of our Orthodox Christology.


text:
Dear Blizzard, Please End Our Loneliness
Adam is yet another story. Don't let him become a statistic.
This is the world you've made, Blizzard, with your dungeon finder. We are all as alone as if we were playing with NPCs, and yet we are not, so the world mocks us and our minds know it.
No more, I say! Or maybe more if it is convenient, but not to such an extreme as the current situation. I'd not want to change instances back to 90% finding a group, 9% finding someone with the UBRS key, and 1% actually running the instance. Incidentally, it was still completely worth it. UBRS is badass.
Add a one second delay.
Before a group is tossed into the instance, wait one second. Check the stew again for players from the same servers. Try to get two together. Three, four, maybe even at a peak time the entire group could be from the same server, and all it takes is one second. That's insignificant. We wait longer than that for DPS to remember how to press the ready button.
Or go a step further and add an option to only queue for one's own server. That player will have a longer wait time, but still shorter than the old days of manual queuing. It gives players a tradeoff of time and potentially higher social interaction. Maybe it wouldn't be used much, but for those players who are no longer alone, it would be worth it.
16 comments:
- Rorran said...
I agree that the world of LFD PuGs can be a lonely, anonymous one. (Perhaps that anonymity and a lack of real accountability is some people's excuse for jackassery.) Yes, at times, running randoms feels impersonal and disconnected.
That being said, use of the LFD tool is a CHOICE. When you click the queue up button, you are accepting that you will probably be put into a group with 4 complete strangers from other realms. You also have the CHOICE to ask around in your realm's Looking For Dungeon channel or General Chat.
Better yet, grow your friends list or join a guild. That'll make it all the easier to enjoy dungeons for their challenge, loot, and social aspect.
I do, however, like your idea of adding an extra option to the LFD tool that limits the pool of group members to your own realm. I'm curious what effect it would have on wait times. That may end up making DPS wait times even longer- especially if tanks and healers disproportionally choose to limit groups to their own realm. Then again, maybe it would have no net noticeable effect on wait times. Sounds like it would be an interesting experiment. - August 10, 2010 at 8:49 AM
- Cassandri said...
It's strange but I swear that the Dungeon Finder is set up to find 5 players from completely different realms.
It's very very rare that I'm paired up with a player from my realm and I rarely see two other players from my group from the same other realm.
That's such a good suggestion about the option to choose your own server players. I would choose that! I want to meet more players from guilds that I'm familiar with and see what they're capable of. I'm also keen to regroup with old guild members and vague acquaintances I've played with in the last four years.
I'm also not sure why we can't queue for anything outside of our XP range. I mean, I would really like to do Scholomance and Stratholm on my Mage (she missed them as she was thrown into Ramparts at lvl 68) but it will never be an option in the Dungeon Finder anymore.
Why can't you queue and be matched up with 4 other people also beyond the level range? - August 10, 2010 at 8:53 AM
- Quicksilver said...
pfff the masses of kids and retards flocking inside this game make it kinda impossible to have any meaningful social interaction...
- August 10, 2010 at 8:55 AM
- Dorgol said...
As a Tank I sometimes put a advert in /2 - "Tank queueing for random, anyone care to come along?"
I always get one or two people.
And they run just as if I had queue'd solo. There is no social interaction with those people taking advantage of my queue time. Why should I? I don't know them!
On the other hand, I have a few people in-game that I chat with constantly. We did a 4-man BWL the other day. Another friend and I do MC, AQ20, BWL, etc. semi-regularly.
All that said - it doesn't matter to me if I have heavy social interaction within WoW. In the 5-years I've been playing I've had several occasions (months long each) where none of my regular "friends" are playing. But I don't mind because I'm still having a blast. - August 10, 2010 at 9:35 AM
- Anonymous said...
Makes me wonder if Blizzard is planning to or may already be working on removing more realm boundaries regarding the friends list, chat channels, AH, etc. I think they'd much prefer that over closing down and merging all those dead realms (= bad PR).
- August 10, 2010 at 10:24 AM
- Anonymous said...
I think you're understating the amount of time it would take in order to have the LFD tool try to match up people from the same server. If nothing else, it's an extra piece of data that has to be cross-checked between five people, while the LFD is scanning the entire pool of people that have queued up.
- August 10, 2010 at 10:54 AM
- DPS said...
There's a ready button!?!
- August 10, 2010 at 12:09 PM
- Anonymous said...
Using LFD is like calling a hooker. It's convenient and gets the job done but it's not going anywhere socially. If you were lonely before, you'll be lonely after.
- August 10, 2010 at 1:43 PM
- Klepsacovic said...
@Rorran: Choice is a word with wildly varying interpretations. At all times we have a choice, just that at many times the choice is between something bad and something worse, or something bad and something ineffective. It's still a choice.
@Cassandri: You can't queue for those for the same reason you can't queue for old raids. (you can)
Incidentally, this is one of those times when I think a deleveling option would be a good idea.
@Okrane S.: I know when I was 14 I wasn't a horribly awful person and if the next 9 years have taughgt me anything it's that people who claim their generation was any better are either liars or delusional. Perhaps I'd not be friends with myself, but I could at least not leave the experience with the desire to write an exceptionally angry blog post.
@Dorgol: How do you get to know them?
@Nees: Merging without having to call it merging?
@Anonymous: A second might be too short, but considering the speed of tank queues from button push to ready check, I doubt this addition would cause a queue increase noticable to anyone else.
@DPS: Way to be part of the problem!
@Anonymous: An excellent analogy, and if you don't mind I'd like to build off that by asking where all the singles meeting places are. - August 10, 2010 at 6:59 PM
- Anonymous said...
I personally approve of this post. And adding an option for choosing only ones server would be huge.
- August 11, 2010 at 2:23 AM
- Quicksilver said...
The fact that 14yo are awful persons or not is not the issue here.
The underlying factors of an MMO - anonymity, needs large play times involved, appeals to people of low intellect or of young age, etc, set up the perfect environment to attract all sort of social misfits.
Give a 14yo anonymity and lack of consequences for their action and they will behave exactly like the most trade chat trolls or loot ninjas out there, regardless of their generation.
I am not claiming *my* generation was better (i've just turned 26 btw - so we're from the same generation), I'm claiming that its safe to assume that everyone you meet in an mmo is a combination of immaturity (kid) and idiocy (retard).
That's why I fail to see the need to make friends wherever you go inside the game - especially 5 mans. You have your guildies, you hear them on vent, you raid together - they could somewhat fill the role of a friend... but other than that... why bother? - August 11, 2010 at 6:56 AM
- Klepsacovic said...
"The fact that 14yo are awful persons or not is not the issue here."
"appeals to people of low intellect or of young age"
But beside that, the point I was trying to make is that it is the situation, as you said. Anonymity and lack of consequences. Lack of interaction only feeds these, making it easier to think of others as not human.
As for that assumption, well, I suppose it's safe in the sense that thanks to anonymity we can all get away with how we treat others.
I'm not searching for friends, I'm searching for interaction, something to indicate that LFD isn't putting me in a group of bots. Right now we're at "ATM" level of interaction and I'd like to see an upgrade to "bank teller". I'm not asking for "personal accountant". - August 11, 2010 at 8:20 AM
- Zahraah said...
I don't do randoms to make friends - you used to do them to impress people with your skills though, and get guild invites ( more so for tanks and healers. ) I am reduced to picking up boys in pug raids now.
- August 12, 2010 at 12:07 AM
- Disciplinary Action said...
It's so easy to push that LFD and collect your Frost and move on. I love the suggestion that we wait an extra few minutes to pick up puggers from our own realm; the never-gonna-see-you-again factor sure does do us all a disservice. Great post.
- August 15, 2010 at 9:38 PM
- Klepsacovic said...
@Zaraah: PUG raids to meet boys? I'm reminded of a joke girls told at my college, a tech school: "The odds are good, but the goods are odd."
@Disciplinary Action: Thanks, but I do hope it adoesn't add minutes to the queue! - August 15, 2010 at 10:28 PM
- rowanblaze said...
@Kleps I think poor Okrane is more of a Troll than you are. ;) I, for one rarely encounter 14-year-olds while playing, at least not that I am aware of. Hard to tell from the toons hanging out in Dal. Plus, what does it say about him, when he describes the "typical" MMO player? He already said he is not 14, so what other trait does that leave?
I like to grab as many Guildies as a I can (easy, as a priest) and then hit the Dungeon Finder to fill out the group or just jump into a dungeon. The only drawback is that you can't talk to any daily quest givers standing outside the dungeon entrance.
The ATM/Bank Teller/Personal Accountant analogy is perfect, though. Sometimes I just want to get in, get my badge, and get out. I'll be your healbot, as long as you're not a douche-bot.
Of course, my ignore list is full of toons from other realms. - August 15, 2010 at 11:59 PM
Post a Comment
Comments in posts older than 21 days will be moderated to prevent spam. Comments in posts younger than 21 days will be checked for ID.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Aloo Matar Rasedaa - Curried Potatoes and Elephant Safari
Aloo Mater Rasedaa - Curried Potatoes.
They don't get much cuter, but she was a surprise. Her Daddy was a rogue.
This is her teen-age mother.
At home in the jungle.
Conference room.
Termite Colony.
From the kitchen of One Perfect Bite...The Silver Fox loves nature. I love the Silver Fox. The bit about jungles and safari was buried in the fine print of our marriage contract. I missed it. He didn't. That's how I ended up in the middle of a jungle on the back of an elephant who cared a good deal more about her offspring than me or my welfare. We had signed on for a four day stay at a Nepali eco-lodge, hoping that would be enough time to see at least some on the wildlife the camp was famous for. As luck would have it, we got to see everything our first morning on safari. That was wonderful. Folks can spend years trying to catch glimpses of the tigers or white rhinos in the reserve. We hit a homer our first time at bat. Our good luck, however, meant we had to come up with other plans to fill the time we had left in camp. Four days can be an eternity in a place that has only intermittent electricity and hot water. It does not encourage the reading or writing of the great American novel and bubble baths are not de rigueur. I spent my time in the primitive kitchen and at the elephant camp watching the antics of a two year old who was such a minx you couldn't help but love her. She's now old enough to walk behind her mother on expedition. If she's hungry she nurses and everyone waits till she's had her fill. If she finds a pile of dirt or an especially lush leaf, she'll stop and play. Everybody waits. If they're lucky they'll escape the dirt she blows their way as an invitation to play. It's also interesting to watch the behavior of the other elephants when she is around. If they scent boar or other animals that might be dangerous, they close ranks and form a protective circle around her. When I tire of the elephants, I wander down to the primitive kitchen and watch them prepare meals for 40 or so guests. There are no appliances to speak of. There are 5 cooks who report to head chef who barks orders but also cooks. The six of then produce breakfast and two large buffets every day. The food they cook must be walked uphill to the dining room. When the meals are over, dishes are walked to another facility to be washed and stored away. The arrangement is uniquely inefficient but the job gets done, even in rainy season. Eco-tours are not for everyone, but if you love nature and being outdoors you'd love to spend some time on jungle safari. I glad I did it. Once!
The food prepared in the kitchen at Temple Tiger was, of necessity, easy to make. It lacked refinement, but it was delicious and there was always plenty of it. I especially like their recipe for curried potatoes and peas. It can be served with any meal, but it is a wonderful addition to the Nepali set I've been talking about building. It perfectly fits the curry component of the dish. Here is the recipe.
Aloo Matar Rasedaa - Curried Potatoes and Peas...from the kitchen of One Perfect Bite
2 pounds baby Yukon Gold potatoes, unpeeled and quartered
2 tablespoon ghee or olive oil
1 medium onion, finely minced
1 teaspoon finely minced ginger
1/4 teaspoon salt
1-1/2 teaspoon turmeric
1-1/2 teaspoon cumin powder
1 teaspoon ground coriander
1/4 to 1/2 teaspoon cayenne or ground red pepper
1 teaspoon cumin seed
1 can (15-oz.) chopped tomatoes, undrained
1/4 teaspoon sugar
1 cup frozen peas, thawed
1/4 teaspoon garam masala
1) Boil potatoes in lightly salted water until barely tender, about 10 minutes. Drain and set aside.
2) Heat oil in a large pot. Add onions and ginger and cook until softened. Stir in turmeric, cayenne, cumin powder, coriander and cumin seed and cook until fragrant.
3) Add potatoes to skillet and stir to coat with spices. Add tomatoes and sugar and simmer until potatoes are tender, about 20 minutes. Stir in peas and garam masala. Cook 5 minutes longer. Add additional water if sauce becomes too thick. Season with salt to taste. Serve hot. Yield: 4 servings.
You might also enjoy these recipes:
Curried Vegetables With Whole Wheat and Couscous - Simply Recipes
Indian Style Curried Vegetables - What's Cookin, Chicago?
Curried Potato and Vegetable Soup - Simply Recipes
Aloo Gobi - No Recipes
Fresh Vegetable Curry - The Whole Life Nutrition Kitchen
Mixed Vegetable Curry - What's Cooking Today
50 comments :
- Flavia Galasso said...
I love this recipe because I love potatoes....but tha animals' picture...make me dream.....!!!HAve a nice day.... hugs , Flavia
- November 18, 2010 at 3:03 AM
Your pictures are fantastic. What a blessing to see all that amazing wildlife.
The curry dish looks great. It reminds me of Aloo gobi, which I love. - November 18, 2010 at 3:05 AM
- Alessandra said...
Perfect dish for me, and the eco resort just my kind of place! And the baby elephant is too cute!
Thanks for sharing!
Alessandra - November 18, 2010 at 3:28 AM
- Priya Suresh said...
Thats a droolworthy aloo matar rasedaa, soo cute baby elephant..
- November 18, 2010 at 3:57 AM
- Diane said...
Great photos, I love that young elephant, it is cute.
Those potatoes look sooooo yummy will give this a try. Diane - November 18, 2010 at 4:07 AM
- Unknown said...
Hi Mary,
The aloo mattar rasedaa looks yummy...beautiful clicks...:)
http://www.myeasytocookrecipes.blogspot.com - November 18, 2010 at 4:42 AM
- Big Dude said...
What a great experience you had. Were you with a tour group the whole time or did you arrange the various mini adventures yourself?
- November 18, 2010 at 7:20 AM
- From the Kitchen said...
Although the San Diego Wild Animal Park is the closest I have (or will) come to being on safari, I am thoroughly enjoying my travels with you! I will be putting more Indian food on our table--that is an adventure we enjoy taking.
Bonnie - November 18, 2010 at 7:23 AM
- kitchen flavours said...
What a great experience. And the baby elephant is so cute. Seeing the tiger, white rhinos and the other wildlife is really a chance in a lifetime! The potatoes looks really delicious. I love potatoes in curry and I'm bookmarking this! Thanks for the recipe.
- November 18, 2010 at 7:44 AM
- Kim said...
Wow! Mary, ou're still pleasing us with your marvelous pictures! The little elephant is soooo cute! Plus, I love your curry!
- November 18, 2010 at 7:54 AM
- Jersey Girl Cooks said...
I love hearing and seeing your great adventures from the trip. Wow, what work to feed all those people.
- November 18, 2010 at 8:01 AM
- Unknown said...
I love curried potatoes...well I like almost anything with curry!! Thanks for the jungle tour, I love the outdoors, but the wildlife that can maul you keeps me from wanting to do things like that. Now I can do it from the safety of my own home thanks to you!
- November 18, 2010 at 8:14 AM
- Jeannie said...
Wow! those photos of the animals are awesome! You managed to photo them so clearly!Love that simple dish of Aloo Matar Rasedaa:) Have a great day!
- November 18, 2010 at 8:33 AM
- Claudia said...
Watching a young elephant play... what a lovely appreciation of the world. The potatoes re so spiced with flavor - one has to love them.
- November 18, 2010 at 9:14 AM
- ๓คקเ said...
Eco safaris are not for me, but I enjoyed reading your account, it had me mildly wishing I was your outdoor type. Alas! I like my comforts, my hot shower at the end of the day and so on.
But I also love simple food and am madly fond of virtually anything containing curry.
I imagine those curried potatoes had a unique taste, such as only made-on-the-spot curry can give... - November 18, 2010 at 9:18 AM
- Katerina said...
Beautiful ispired dish by your trip to India!
- November 18, 2010 at 9:43 AM
- tinyskillet said...
What a great experience you had at the elephant camp. Mary, I am thilled you are sharing all these recipes with us. I love curried potatoes and usually eat them in some dosa. My daughter even loves it. I'll try this one next time!
- November 18, 2010 at 10:25 AM
- nesrin said...
Tolle Fotos!
- November 18, 2010 at 10:35 AM
- Ushnish Ghosh said...
Dear Mary
Thank you so much for visiting my Blog. I feel good.
I like this writing and your detailing on Elephant and the kitchen and cooking activity. This dish is very nice, will try soon.
Is this on Royal Chitwan National Park of Nepal? Haven't gone there so far.
Best regards - November 18, 2010 at 10:58 AM
- Rita said...
I do enjoy reading abaout your excursion;you are a brave lady, I must say. I find the curried potato dish really intersting. My sister always added potatoes to her curried dishes and was so tasty. Have nice weekend.
Rita - November 18, 2010 at 11:22 AM
- ♥ Kathy said...
That baby elephant is precious & I love the tiger & rhino pics too! How cool that you got to capture those images!! The food looks yummy too :)
- November 18, 2010 at 11:35 AM
- StephenC said...
I am thrilled for you that you are having such a great adventure. The curry with potatoes is right up my alley.
- November 18, 2010 at 11:41 AM
- PeggyR said...
Another yummy dish and I love hearing about your trip and seeing your pictures.
- November 18, 2010 at 12:22 PM
- Pam said...
What an amazing adventure that I would love to experience, although I would miss hot water! The curried potatoes look tasty.
- November 18, 2010 at 1:08 PM
- Tasha said...
This recipe sounds wonderful. I have to tell you I absolutely loved the line in your post about the fine print in your marriage contract! It does sound like an amazing experience, though.
- November 18, 2010 at 1:41 PM
- aipi said...
This is my all time fav curry..you made it beautifully Mary..
All the pics are lovely..the baby elephant is adorable!
US Masala - November 18, 2010 at 1:56 PM
- Valerie Harrison (bellini) said...
Thanks for continuing to share your culinary and extraordinary journey woth us Mary.
- November 18, 2010 at 2:07 PM
- The Blonde Duck said...
LOVE the baby elephant!
- November 18, 2010 at 2:16 PM
- Faith said...
Oh wow, what an adventure! My hubby loves nature and especially tigers, so I'm sharing this post with him. That baby elephant is really so adorable! The curried potatoes look wonderful!
- November 18, 2010 at 3:04 PM
- Unknown said...
The potato looks excellent and so do the wildlife photos!
- November 18, 2010 at 3:28 PM
- Ginny Hartzler said...
What a story! I couldn't believe, looking at these pictures, that you were so close to these animals, especially the tiger. But I guess you were on an elephant, and they all leave the elephants alone. This potato dish does look good, and the baby elephant is just so cute!!
- November 18, 2010 at 3:49 PM
- Emily Z said...
Hi Mary, it has been a while since I have come by! I hope you are well! This recipe looks wonderful, I love curry! Fun pictures from the safari! I would LOVE to do something like this - the closest I have some to a safari was on our honeymoon... we went on a "safari" in the Busch Gardens in Tampa, and we got to feed and pet giraffes, but I can't say it compares to your experience. The baby elephant is just precious. Thank you for sharing!
- November 18, 2010 at 4:02 PM
- Erin said...
Wow! your photos are amazing! I was in India this summer on a veterinary student exchange externship, and the closest we got to non-captive animals was in Mudumali. We got up close and personal with a bunch of elephants but we barely saw a leopard - up in a tree, far in the distance.
Do you just a a giant telephoto lense or were you really that close to a tiger? - November 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM
- Biren @ Roti n Rice said...
That dish sounds delicious! I love potatoes with curry. They just go so well together.
Sounds like you had quite a trip. This eco trip sounds interesting, especially for the animal lover. Thanks for sharing all those amazing pictures :) - November 18, 2010 at 4:29 PM
- Mary Bergfeld said...
Erin, I don't know which of your blogs is current, so I thought I'd answer you here. Bob used a telephoto lens to capture the tiger. We were close to him but never in any danger. They are people shy. We always kept our cameras ready to go when tracking. If you have to fumble with the camera you miss the opportunity to get a shot. The elephants had picked up the tigers scent so we knew something was around and we were ready for him when he appeared. The rhino was taken with my point and shoot camera, so special equipment is not always necessary. I hope you're having a great day. Blessings...Mary.
- November 18, 2010 at 5:06 PM
- Joyti said...
The curried potatoes and peas are a classic dish at temples and prayers...yours looks and sounds just perfect.
And the safari looks pretty magical. - November 18, 2010 at 5:57 PM
- RamblingTart said...
You brave, wonderful lady. :-) You're such a trooper to accompany your man on these adventures. :-) I love your photos!!! The animals are just stunning. Wow. How fun to get to putter in that oh so rustic kitchen. :-)
- November 18, 2010 at 7:44 PM
- Joe Ambrosino said...
So that's how you make it!
- November 18, 2010 at 9:33 PM
- Kim said...
Mary - It looks and sounds like you and your husband had the trip of a lifetime. Awesome - in every sense of the word. I can't imagine seeing those animals up close and personal in their natural environment. Wow! Great job braving your way through the safari :)
The curried potatoes look wonderful. I had a similar dish earlier in the year and found it to be especially satisfying and comforting. - November 18, 2010 at 10:57 PM
- scrambledhenfruit said...
That little elephant is adorable! What an amazing experience. That curry dish looks delicious. :)
- November 18, 2010 at 11:10 PM
- Krista said...
What a wonderful trip! Loved seeing all of the pictures of the animals. Amazing! The potatoes look delicious...but I can understand how the accomodations left something to be desired. Glad you had such an adventure!
- November 19, 2010 at 12:07 AM
- Shivani said...
Seems you have enjoyed the safari a lot, liked all your snaps and the recipe is perfect.
http://www.subhiksa.blogspot.com/ - November 19, 2010 at 12:55 AM
- Monet said...
I so enjoyed seeing all of these pictures. Your trip reminds me of my time in Africa. I was able to see so many beautiful animals. It sounds like you were able to experience so many different foods, places, and people. Just wonderful! Thank you for sharing this lovely curry dish, dear. I hope you have a wonderful Friday!
- November 19, 2010 at 1:19 AM
- Coleens Recipes said...
I assume we are not in Kansas anymore Toto? Beautiful photos.
- November 19, 2010 at 1:20 AM
- Lucie said...
I love reading the tale of your adventure, Mary. Such a cute baby elephant! Your recipes seem to capture the spirit of the meals you describe so well.
- November 19, 2010 at 2:31 AM
- CailinMarie said...
wow. this is simply fascinating and I think you are so lucky to have seen a tiger! I've been fascinated with tigers since childhood - well animals really. I tried to teach myself chinese from a book when I was 12 so I could go study panda bears :-) Hmmm... maybe when our kids are bigger Tim and I can try out an eco tour. Although I'll admit I do like a hot shower...
- November 19, 2010 at 3:23 PM
- My Little Space said...
Lucky you, Mary! It's not easy to see all those animals in one day! And the cub sounded so much fun too. This is such an interesting & adventurous trip. All worth it! The kitchen and the suroundings look really tidy and clean too. I think the workers there did such a facinating job. Thanks so much for taking us along the trip. Have a great weekend.
Kristy - November 20, 2010 at 7:20 AM
- Alicia Foodycat said...
I am so envious that you saw a tiger!
- November 21, 2010 at 2:40 PM
- Lori said...
Wow! Where do I begin. What an amazing journey. You crack me up about the jungle safaris being in fineprint. So many things are in fine print arent they? Or maybe not. But I digress.
I would love and hate the safari all at the same time. But that elephant might just make it so much better. And of course this curry. - November 25, 2010 at 9:02 PM
- Katie said...
wow this looks so real, authentic and fabulous.
it looks like you had a fantastic journey.
thank you for this recipe, I am not a fan of spices but I can cut some of those out.
THANK YOU! - August 14, 2011 at 8:01 PM


text:
Hellsixfirm.live search hijacker is a sort of virus that injects into your computer system, and afterwards switches the browser search engine configurations in your web browser to one which it is paid for. It additionally makes different unwanted modifications that can result in personal information leakages, as well as to various other malware penetration. In this post, you will read the tutorial of Hellsixfirm.live hijacker elimination in various options, and also the technique of making your web browser like new.
Hellsixfirm.live Info
Name | Hellsixfirm.live extension |
Type | Browser hijacker1 |
Short Description | The unwanted software that amends important browser settings without the user's permission. |
Symptoms | The Hellsixfirm.live hijacker replaces the browser parameters set by the users and replaces these settings with its own values. |
Distribution Method | Bundling with Freeware or Shareware, misleading pop-up ads produced by adware. |
Detection Tool | Inspect If Your System Has Been Affected by the Hellsixfirm.live hijacker. |
The ways of injection of Hellsixfirm.live search hijackers are numerous. The majority of them belong to the malware spreading through the malvertising or malevolent web links of different websites. Occasionally, your computer can be contaminated with this malware with the trojan-downloader, which is put into action to distribute various other malware. There is a solitary kind of this unwanted program – web browser plugin that might build right into any browser which supports the add-on installation2.
You will not likely mount this plugin on your own, since their names are quite suspicious, and the usefulness is very questionable. The "creators" of Hellsixfirm.live hijacker typically mention that it can save the .doc/.docx files from the sites already to .pdf format, or to download the entire web site on your disk. It is really tough to picture if someone can be needed in such operations in 2024, when the Internet access is not time-limited and every PC has the ability to start the needed .docx documents at Google Docs.
Nevertheless, besides their impracticality, they may easily be found in the Chrome Web Store. Certainly, virus experts sound the alarm concerning such spam right into the legitimate source of browser extensions, calling for the Google reaction – getting rid of these extensions from their site. However, they are still not hurrying to repair that protection issue.
Is the Hellsixfirm.live virus?
At the first sight, you can think that these redirects are just frustrating, but not risky. As a result of this factor a number of users are simply playing for time as opposed to eliminating this malware, getting more and more possibilities of being contaminated with numerous other viruses, which are much more severe than Hellsixfirm.live is.
Besides the modified search engine or search results, you may likewise see various ads even on those internet sites that do not have any advertisements on it by default. And you may just misclick while turning off the ad, and launch the downloading of an unidentified file, which can be a virus, or a potentially unwanted application, and even ransomware – whatever the maintainers of this hijacker desire.
If your web browser is damaged because of the Azorult trojan task, the system can begin malfunctioning in the near future – this symptome is among the most common in case of trojan injection.
How to remove Hellsixfirm.live?
First, let me say several words about prevention the Hellsixfirm.live virus infiltration. It is very easy to refer to the options of securing your PC from such frustrating items as browser hijackers, but it is really easy to be caught on this bait even being a qualified user. As it was stated above, this unwanted program can hide after the eye-catching (at the first sight) ad, or in packs with various other adware you can get in dozens of manners. But no matter the typical intricacy of the infiltration methods, it is really simple to avoid the Hellsixfirm.live hijacker presence in your system:
- Do not follow the dubious links;
- Restrict the usage of pseudo-free software (one which is offered as free, but has an additional unwanted programs in its pack);
- Leave the habit of clicking advertisements on the web. If you need to buy something, it is better to google it;
- Avoid downloading the files from dubious sources, like forums or file sharing websites.
Preparation before removing Hellsixfirm.live.
Before starting the actual uninstall procedure, we recommend that you do the following introductory milestones.
- Ensure you have this hand-operated tutorial constantly all set to use.
- Execute a back-up of all of your data, consisting of the kept logins, passwords as well as other credentials. You must support your information with a cloud backup service and make sure your data are protected from any kind of sort of loss, even from the most extreme infections.
- Wait up until the long-lasting backup procedure is over.
Step 1: Uninstall Hellsixfirm.live and related software from Windows
Here is a technique in couple of very easy steps that should have the ability to uninstall most applications. Either you use Windows 10, 8, 7, Vista or XP, these milestones will work well. Moving the app or its folder to the Trash can be a very wrong idea. In case you do that, remnants of the app may remain, and that can cause the unstable performance of your system, malfunctions with the file type associations and other unpleasant behavior. The effective solution to get an app off your device is to remove it manually. To do that:
1. Keep holding the Windows Logo Button and "R" on your keyboard. A Pop-up window will soon arrive.
2. In the field that appeared, type in "appwiz.cpl" -1 and choose OK – 2.
3. This will open a window with all the apps available on the device. Choose the app that you want to get rid of, then choose "Uninstall"
Follow the steps above and you will successfully get rid of most unwanted apps.
Step 2: Get rid of Hellsixfirm.live from all your available browsers.
1. Launch Mozilla Firefox. Go to its menu window
2. Choose the "Add-ons" icon in the menu.
3. Find the unwanted extension and select "Remove"
4. Upon deleting the extension, reload Mozilla Firefox, closing it with the help of a red "X" button in the upper right corner and start it again.
1. Launch Google Chrome and go to its drop menu
2. Click on "Tools" and then in the extended menu select "Extensions"
3. In the "Extensions" menu find the unwanted extension and apply the "Remove" button related to it.
4. As soon as the extension is deleted, reload Google Chrome by closing it by means of the red "X" button at the top right corner and launch it again.
1. Launch Internet Explorer
2. Click on the gear icon marked 'Tools' to open the drop menu and choose 'Manage Add-ons'
3. In the "Manage Add-ons" window, locate the extension you want to delete and then click "Remove". A pop-up window will come up to inform you that you are about to delete the selected extension, and some more add-ons might be disabled as well. Leave all the boxes checked, and choose "Remove".
4. Once the unwanted extension is deleted, reload Internet Explorer by shutting it down from the red "X" button located at the top right corner and launch it again.
1. Launch Edge
2. Access the drop menu by clicking on the icon at the top right corner.
3. From the drop menu choose "Extensions".
4. Locate the suspected dangerous extension you want to delete and then click on the Remove button.
Step 3: Clean any registries that could be added by Hellsixfirm.live on your device.
The usually attacked registries of Windows machines are the following:
- HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
- HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
- HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce
- HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce
You can access them by going to the Windows registry editor and getting rid of any values added by Hellsixfirm.live. Follow the steps below:
- Start the Run Window command once again, type "regedit" and click OK.
- As soon as you open it, you can freely go to the Run and RunOnce keys, whose locations are displayed above.
- You can delete the value of the virus by right-clicking on it and deleting it.
Tip: To locate a virus-created value, you can right-click on it and select "Modify" to find which file it is set to run. If this is the malware file location, delete the value.
Step 4: Scan for Hellsixfirm.live with Loaris Trojan Remover
1. Click on the "Download" button to proceed to Loaris Trojan Remover download.
It is recommended to run a scan before purchasing the full version of the software to make sure that the current version of the malware can be detected by Trojan Remover. Click on the corresponding links to check License Agreement, Privacy Policy.
2. Click "Install" to start.
There were 4 scan types suggested:
- Standard Scan.
- Full Scan.
- Custom Scan.
- Removable Scan.
3. After the installed has finished, click on the 'Scan' tab. Click on 'Full Scan'.
4. Once the scanning is started, Loaris will initiate the thorough analysis of your device and may soon identify specific threats currently slowing down the performance of your system. Make sure to wait until the scanning is completed to let the software fully evaluate the safety of your workstation.
5. After Loaris Trojan Remover has finished scanning your PC for any files of the associated threat and found them, you can try to get them removed automatically and permanently by clicking on the 'Apply' button. There were options to move the files to quarantine, ignore or delete them.
If any threats have been removed, it is highly recommended to restart your PC.
- About browser hijackers on Wikipedia
- Possible danger of free browser extensions


text:
Charleville Charleville Australia
Immortalised in Slim Dusty's song by the same name, Charleville is the largest town in Queensland's south west and is a hub for visitors and pastoralists alike. In the heart of 'mulga country', Charleville and surrounding pastoral properties are rich in history, flora and fauna. Meander along the Charleville Heritage Trail to see some impressive examples of pioneer architecture and learn about the history of the town. The Save the Bilby Fund, at the National Parks Research Station, is worth a visit for an up close and personal experience with Australia's most famous endangered marsupial. Speaking of up close and personal, the Cosmos Centre provides an intimate look at the night sky, and with the outback's low residual light, there's no better place to do so. If you time your visit with the Charleville Campdraft, one of the region's largest, you'll be able to see skillful demonstrations of timeless bush horse skills as riders and their horses work together to guide cattle through a timed course. Charleville also holds a rodeo, where cowboys and girls conquer their fears to ride wild and powerful beasts. Gazetted in 1868, Charleville was named after a town in Ireland where the government surveyor of the day once lived. Rail transport from Brisbane reached the town in 1888 and is still in use as a passenger line today. Cobb and Co, the famous coach company, based their largest coach making factory in Australia in the township of Charleville in 1890. The factory was moved to Charleville because the wood used in coaches made in factories closer to the coast would split and crack in the dry, dusty conditions of Western Queensland. On the subject of transport, Qantas scheduled its first fare paying passenger service from Charleville to Cloncurry, via Longreach and Winton, back in 1922. Charleville is home to south west Queensland's largest Royal Flying Doctor Service base that serves remote communities as far afield as Birdsville, 900 kilometres to the west.


text:
- Item Code:V20227
- Origin:UK
- Composition: Wool
- Product Width:150 公分
- Product Weight: 250 克
- Available:1 Piece Only, Total Qty=1.6m
- Idea For: All seasons jacket
Following is the indication for products with 0.25m in unit!
**Price per 0.25 Meters**
1.75m=0.25 x 7pieces;
2m = 0.25 x 8 pieces;
2.25m =0.25 x 9 pieces;
3m =0.25 x 12 pieces
Actual colours may vary. This is due to the fact that every computer monitor has a different capability to display colours and that everyone sees these colours differently. We try to edit our photos to show the samples as life-like as possible, but please understand the actual colour may vary slightly from your monitor. We cannot guarantee that the colour you see accurately portrays the true colour of the product.
The suit fabric & garment explorer. Yoo's Club operated & owned by Golden Circle Trading Limited (Hong Kong).
Invite customers to join your newsletter.
Link to your privacy policy.


text:
MIYUKI 1385 Round Seed Beads – Dyed Opaque Carnation Pink 11/0
Size: 2mm in diameter, hole: 0.8mm
Material: Glass
Manufacturer: Miyuki
Country of Origin: Made in Japan
Brand: MIYUKI
Miyuki Round Rocailles seed beads can be used to create colorful, quality works of art. These high quality round rocailles beads are consistent in color, size, shape and finish, which are preferred for the use in loom and off-loom applications such as fashion designing, fine arts, jewelry making, showcase beautiful stitches, shining details, etc.
These round Japanese seed beads are also a popular choice for bead weaving projects that require multiple thread passes. Using these beauties along with a wide variety of beads and findings for creating beautiful designs will bring your weaving delight.
MIYUKI is the oldest seed beads manufacturer in Japan. MIYUKI glass beads are considered as the inchesworld standard inches because of their high quality, color brilliance, and uniform shape. They are highly sought after by fashion designers, artists and bead fans alike. MIYUKI can produce various types and shapes of seed beads, such as Delica, TILA, Round Rocailles, Drop, etc.
- Fades in sun or deterioration with time: There is no problem in normal use.
- Rubbing from friction/skin acid: There is no problem in normal use.
- Dry cleaning: There is no problem in normal use.
- Nickle: There is no problem in normal use.


text:
What we're about
DO YOU LOVE HIKING & ADVENTURE? DALLAS WILDLIFE is a group of easy-going people who love getting away from Dallas. In addition, we love participating in a variety of outdoors activities such as camping, backpacking, and hiking. We began our favorite activity, creek walking, in 2001 along the spring water corridors of Garland, Texas. We joined Meetup.com's calendaring system in 2004 before it became a paid subscription service, which is today funded by our group sponsors. Since our humble beginning as a group of creek walking friends, scores of local outdoor enthusiasts have joined with us in sharing our love of nature and the outdoors. Couples are as welcome as singles at our events.
DESTINATIONS: Our favorite destinations include the Spring Creek Forest Preserve, Cedar Ridge Nature Preserve, the Fort Worth Nature Center, the Heard Museum, Turner Falls, OK, Beaver's Bend, AR, Colorado Bend State Park, the Comal River in New Braunfels, the Guadalupe River in Gruene, Lost Maples State Park, Pedernales Falls State Park in Austin, Hamilton Pool; and Zilker Park in Austin. Our favorite activities include hiking, backpacking, creek walking, canoeing, visiting caves, camping, and rock climbing! Most of ours favorite local hikes include spring water and forested trails! We target our road trips to include waterfalls, photography, swimming, fall color hikes, eco projects at local preserves, and even dog walks. As there is demand, we throw in a spattering of extreme sports to the calendar several times a year for those who like zip lining, rafting, kayaking, mountain biking, scuba diving, etc. Some of our more popular and unusual events include fossil hunting and zip lining.
PREMIUM MEMBERSHIPS: Premium membership is a reward for those who donate money or time to keep our group on Meetup, a subscription based service. Please consider your membership a contribution. Currently your Organizer pays this fee on a monthly basis. Please send premium membership dues via Paypal to followthattrail @ gmail.com. The majority of our local events are free and led by volunteers. Since our group likes to camp and travel, there are special cases where we must restrict attendance, such as where a hike leader spends an exhorbitant amount of time or money planning an event, or where alcohol is involved, or where an event occurs on private property. Premium members receive the discounted attendance fee, whereas regular members pay full price. If you want to be a premium member but can't afford the $50 fee, please consider becoming a hike leader. Hike leaders earn their Premium membership through hard work and contributions to the group.
PHOTOGRAPHY: Please visit our member photo album to see all the cool places we have visited!
PHOTOS ON OUR HOME PAGE: If you are dying of curiosity, the photos on our home page have been taken by members of our group. The background photo rotates monthly to reflect one of our hikes. The smaller picture is usually a group shot or if a particularly outstanding image has been uploaded to the photos area it may be substituted. We have an unusually gifted bunch of photographers in our group and we are proud of them!
GET INVOLVED: We need Assistant Organizers and event sponsors! If you don't see your preferred activity listed, or if you don't see a hike on your side of town, please volunteer by contacting the Organizer! It's easy! We welcome event & group sponsors who need a little publicity for a great price! Sponsoring an event such as canoeing or kayaking is also a great way to get attention.
HIKING: For those of you new to the state of Texas, hiking has two definitions 1. to travel a far distance and 2. to climb upwards. While Texans primarily engage in the distance type of hiking, we do try to include trips to more mountainous elevations for variety. If you have suggestions, please feel free to make them.


text:
Final Step of Validation of Postal Tracking Numbers 670917
You are at the final step, where you can verify the tracking number. Using the service indicator code, determine the type of parcel and find the courier that issued your tracking number. The data is sorted by the first two letters (Service Indicator Code). Look at your number and find the first two letters from the list. You can use the hotkeys Ctrl+F for Windows or Command+F on Mac or Mobile Chrome (select More (3 dots) > Find and edit > Find...) to speed up the search.
If you have found your Service Indicator Code, you will see the type of your parcel and a list of numbers divided by postal operators. For example, if the parcel is from China, the tracking number will end in "CN", and the postal operator is China Post. If you are waiting for a parcel from the USA, the number will end in the "US", indicating that the carrier is USPS.
Find your postal service from the list, where you will see valid tracking numbers. If your number is on this list, you can be sure that your number has been validated and complies with the UPU S10 standard.
If you haven't found your tracking number, this is also possible. In this case, pay attention to any carrier's Serial Number and Check-Digit (9 digits in the center of the tracking number). If they correspond to your tracking number, it also indicates that the number is valid.
Now what? You have found out everything possible about your number. If you are convinced your number is correct, we advise you to track it on our parcel tracker. Pay attention to where the package is going. It is essential to know that the package is moving precisely towards you, and you can react if this is not the case.
If you make a mistake and select the wrong numbers in step 2, go back a step or back to the first step.