text:
Cross Examination
I have been a religious sister for more than thirty years, part of a community that has been active in this country for over a century, and whose work centers on teaching and health care. Our order belongs to an umbrella organization, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), which represents 95 percent of U.S. Catholic women's congregations.
Thanks to recent Vatican actions, the LCWR has garnered a few headlines. In February the Vatican announced it would conduct a three-year "visitation" to assess the "quality of life" of American sisters. A month later, the president of LCWR received a letter from Cardinal William Levada, formerly archbishop of San Francisco and now head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), informing her that there would also be an investigation, or "doctrinal assessment," of the Leadership Conference itself. Certain problems, Levada explained, needed to be addressed. As it turns out, these have to do with the LCWR's alleged failure to express sufficiently rigorous doctrinal compliance with several recent church documents. Evidently, the Vatican is concerned that the LCWR has not been forthcoming about the magisterium's teachings regarding the ordination of women, the relation of the Catholic Church to non-Christian religions, and the "intrinsically disordered" nature of homosexual acts.
The Vatican's visitation—conducted under the auspices of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life (CICLSAL)—does not assess the "quality of life" of cloistered orders of Carmelites, Benedictines, Dominicans, or other communities devoted to the monastic contemplative life. Neither does it assess international congregations with members working in the United States whose central motherhouses are outside this country. Rather, the visitation exclusively targets active women religious whose centers and houses of formation are in the United States—women educated here and trained for religious life here, women who work with major health-care and educational institutions in this country, and who collaborate with one another financially on ministerial projects such as peace and justice ministries.
Why are American sisters being singled out? One widely shared area of concern, of course, is the dramatic drop in vocations in recent decades. Forty years ago, there were 180,000 vowed sisters across the country; today there are fewer than 60,000. Yet the number of priests has also dropped precipitously during the same period, leaving more than 10 percent of parishes without resident pastors. Why isn't the priest shortage the subject of a visitation? And during the same period U.S. bishops have presided over a sexual-abuse scandal that has cost the Catholic community more than $2 billion and the episcopacy much of its moral credibility. So why no visitation for the bishops?
I want to offer my own view, as an ordinary member of a congregation that belongs to the LCWR, of what is happening to American sisters.
Let me begin by saying that I want to believe in the good will of the institutional church. An essential part of my commitment to Christ is a belief in the holiness of the church; that is what I professed when I took my vows. For me, religious life outside the structure of the institutional church is hardly imaginable. I love the church. I love its vision of God, its Scriptures and sacraments, its heritage, its tradition of faithful change, its saints and thinkers. I believe in its mission and future.
Yet my reaction to the visitation, and especially to the prospect of "doctrinal assessment," contains more than a little skepticism. While I'm glad for a chance to "let Rome know the truth" about our lives and our devotion to Christ, I can't help suspecting that those behind these initiatives are not primarily interested in the quality of my spiritual life. To put it bluntly, I feel that American women religious are being bullied. The fact that the visitation is apparently being paid for by anonymous donors, and that the leaders of our communities will not be permitted to see the investigative reports that issue from it, does not engender trust. And indeed, the dynamics of the visitation and investigation so far have been experienced by women religious as secretive, unfriendly, and one-sided.
The implicit accusation underlying the doctrinal assessment of the LCWR is that its leaders are not Catholic enough in the church's eyes. Having lived, worked, and prayed with these women for decades, I find this suggestion both insulting and absurd—so absurd, in fact, that one wonders whether the investigation is actually meant to undermine confidence in women's leadership of their own congregations. Canon law, as well as the constitutions of our congregations, ensures that vowed members can freely elect our own leaders, rather than have them imposed on the community by a bishop. Like those in other vowed religious congregations, I have acted on the belief that democratic governance of my community is ultimately guided by the Holy Spirit. In helping me choose our leadership, I have relied on my knowledge of my sisters' gifts and my history of prayer and dependence on the Holy Spirit. Yet Cardinal Levada now informs me that the doctrinal integrity of those leaders is questionable.
The threat of disciplinary action makes it difficult for women religious to speak out on this topic. That is why I am writing anonymously. I happen to trust my local bishop and thank my lucky stars for him. But what if a bishop from some other diocese, or an American cleric at the Vatican—or a bishop on a USCCB committee who wanted to make a show of doctrinal orthodoxy-decided to target me for what I have written? This has happened to other sisters. In the current climate, would my bishop be willing to violate the tacit norm that bishops "don't criticize one another in public" by intervening to defend me? I don't want to put him in such a position.
And that's not the only worry. When a bishop wants to go after an individual sister—to "make an example of that nun"—he often has some Vatican office write a letter to the superior or the president of her congregation, pressuring the leadership to "do something." The rule is judgment first, evidence later; and if the women in leadership don't do something to punish the allegedly wayward sister, the Vatican will move against them. It's a form of collective punishment, and the threat keeps rank-and-file women religious silent on controversial topics—such as the visitation. And so with a few notable exceptions, such as Sisters Joan Chittister, OSB, and Sandra Schneiders, IHM, the rank and file has been silent about the visitation since it began nine months ago. Members don't want to say anything that will draw down the Vatican's wrath on their leadership.
Cardinal Levada has delegated the work of doctrinal assessment of the LCWR to Bishop Leonard Blair of Toledo, Ohio. Bishop Blair seems a genial man; yet his dissertation for his doctorate at the Angelicum in Rome was titled "Masculine and Feminine Symbolism in the Church: A Reappreciation of the Marian/Feminine Dimension." I'm sorry, but I tend to get nervous when bishops start expatiating on the symbolism of the eternal feminine. Bishop Blair was also a member of a bishops' committee that was scheduled to meet at the University of Notre Dame last year, but moved the meeting off campus to protest a performance of The Vagina Monologues. Suffice it to say, most bishops are good and well-meaning men; still, it is the rare bishop who has any real understanding of the lives women actually lead.
Let's back up a bit and ask: Where did the impetus for the visitation and investigation originate? During a visit to Rome last April, several officers of the Leadership Conference put this question to Cardinal Franc Rodé, head of CICLSAL, and were informed that the initiative had been suggested by American members of the curia, some U.S. bishops, and some members of religious communities. Cardinal Rodé told LCWR officers that "concerns" had been expressed on issues ranging from living arrangements to the lack of new vocations to the public positions some women religious take on topics such as women's ordination, homosexuality, and abortion.
In early August, the Vatican made available the twelve-page Instrumentum laboris that outlined the visitation process. The document's provisions are not reassuring. For instance, no women representatives of American congregations are slated to speak to Cardinal Rodé; nor will any be allowed to read a draft of the report submitted to him by the appointed "visitator," Mother Mary Clare Millea, ACSJ. Thus, no congregational president will have the chance to qualify the report's evaluation or dispute its conclusions—or even to see a list of the American cardinals and bishops who recommended the study in the first place. Such secrecy does not create a climate in which the church's pastoral outreach can be effectively communicated; and one suspects that Rome's interventions will hardly promote vocations to women's religious communities.
There are other concerns. Being a pontifical institute, rather than a diocesan congregation, carries the privilege of self-governance, which protects women religious from a local bishop's intrusion into their internal life and governance. Or, it's supposed to. Ominously, the visitation initiative calls for a willingness on the part of visitation team members to make a public profession of faith and take an oath of fidelity to the Apostolic See. The visitation decree instructs the apostolic visitator to "seek information from those diocesan bishops" where the sisters' "general houses, provincial houses, and centers of initial formation are located." That reinforces the suspicion that some diocesan bishops, still trying to reclaim the moral authority lost in the sexual-abuse scandals, want to assert personal and jurisdictional authority over women religious. Some women's communities, to be honest, also worry about designs bishops might have on appropriating their properties.
The inquisitorial spirit behind the current initiative contrasts sharply with that taken by Pope John Paul II in the early 1980s, documented in Religious Life in the U.S. Church: The New Dialogue (1984). Then, the pope asked bishops to assist in a process aimed at strengthening and encouraging religious life for women. The purpose was to widen a dialogue between U.S. religious and U.S. bishops, and between members of U.S. religious communities and the church as a whole. It was a credible effort to help create a greater sense of communion in the church surrounding the role of vowed women and men. This was an era when many women religious participated in cross-congregational discussions in a sincere effort to reach out to their bishops and to the church as a whole; in that context, an invitation to dialogue by John Paul II was heard and responded to with gratitude and candor. Today, the Vatican's interest in American women alone has the feel—at best—of an examination. Any pastoral invitation to dialogue in the current visitation has largely been compromised by Cardinal Levada's simultaneous investigation of the LCWR's doctrinal orthodoxy.
The plain fact is: Since the early 1980s the Vatican has not seemed interested in hearing what women religious themselves think about the quality of life in their own communities. This lack of interest puzzles and disappoints. These women are members of congregations that have taught in Catholic grade schools and high schools, academies and colleges. They are the sisters who staffed hospitals and still sponsor health-care systems throughout the United States; who have pooled millions of dollars in sisterly commitment to relieve homelessness; who have formed national coalitions, partnering with local and national government, to provide and manage low-cost housing projects.
These are the same women religious who for years have asked the laity—begged is really the word—to contribute to the Retirement Fund for Religious, a national effort to shore up religious communities' inadequate retirement funds. This effort is needed because nuns have been woefully underpaid by parishes and dioceses, and received no pensions as teachers in Catholic parish schools; their subsidized housing evaporated decades ago, as pastors found alternative uses for convents. When thinking about women religious, Catholics often assume that "the church is taking care of them." I have to remind people that there is no check in the mail from the Vatican or from local bishops to women religious. Residences and medical care for retired priests are taken care of by dioceses. Religious communities are on their own. Sisters who served in diocesan ministries still must provide for their own retirement and medical coverage.
Instead of extending a helping hand, however, Rome evidently wants the minds and hearts of American sisters to be retested for orthodoxy. It's not lifelong fidelity to the church that matters, but conformity of mind to current formulations of doctrine, formulations that theologians and even bishops have not reached a consensus on. Why demand such uniformity of opinion from the LCWR, which is not a theological organization? Why is Rome demanding submission from women religious to church teachings that honestly perplex most Catholics?
The assumption seems to be that in putting aside our habits and moving out of parish convents, we somehow misplaced our true charism. I can tell you that this view of vowed religious women is nothing more than caricature. I admire my community's practical innovations since taking up the call of the council to adapt our ministry and community life to the needs of our times, to renew our spiritual life, and to follow Christ by retrieving the charism of our founder. Since I entered religious life, my community has continued to serve the church in our traditional ministries while encouraging a flowering of new initiatives that, I am sure, would have delighted our founder.
Several months ago, a well-regarded U.S. bishop remarked to a gathering of clergy and laity that he understood his ordination as bishop as a mandate to carry out the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. He sensed that there has been a pulling-back from such efforts, and lamented the retreat, asserting that if he ever had to make a choice between carrying out this mandate and being obedient to Rome, "I would resign." In light of his remarks, one wonders whether the "quality of life" question about women religious is best understood as part of a battle among the bishops over the implementation of Vatican II. Is control over the lifestyle, dress, work-sphere, and public voice of women religious a matter of which side wins?
To be sure, how we are to interpret Perfectae caritatis, the council's statement on the renewal of religious life, especially when read in the context of Lumen gentium and Gaudium et spes, remains a source of deep contention in the church and even among women religious. The tension between "leaving the world" and "embracing the world" inevitably creates conflicts over how vowed religious life should be organized. Right now, Rome seems partial to an ecclesiology that emphasizes institutional boundaries rather than cooperative engagement with the larger world, and this bias raises the need for a theological dialogue in which women religious explain why they discarded the habit, embraced new ministries, and yet managed to preserve a faithful spiritual life even when they lived outside the walls of a convent building.**
I am proud of my community's support for members who went back to school for higher degrees and began doing new kinds of work. Reflecting the call of the council, the LCWR's sense of religious commitment is shaped by dialogue with the world and its political systems. For almost three decades, the organization's public resolutions have reflected a focus on issues addressed by U.S. bishops: universal access to health care and economic justice for all; protection of refugees and immigrants; opposition to war-making, the death penalty, and apartheid; promotion of the human rights of women; revocation of debt for poor countries; and care for the environment. For the member communities of LCWR, vows include taking public stands on social and political issues; the group's Web site broadcasts its mission "to advocate against poverty, racism, powerlessness, or any other form of violence or oppression."
An exhibit sponsored by the LCWR, and currently traveling across the United States under the title "Women and Spirit: Catholic Sisters in America," honors Catholic sisters and their contributions to national life and culture. The exhibit chronicles a nearly two-hundred-year period in which vowed women came to this country and built motherhouses, hospitals, schools, orphanages, and training centers. Attracting new members, they became embedded in the fabric of American society, defining Catholic life while ministering and supporting the growth of the church over many decades of service. Are the cardinals and bishops who suggested the visitation and investigation interested in this rich history, and in women's thoughts about their vocational commitment? These bishops want to know why things aren't the way they used to be, but they don't seem to want to hear the answer from religious women.
Perhaps there exists a basic problem of communication. Perhaps the personal and interpretive language women religious speak to each other is not sufficiently "Vaticanese." The theological worldview of women has evolved in ways that bishops may not understand, let alone accept. When I entered religious life after Vatican II, it was already taken for granted in sister-formation that the traditional language and categories of theology, mysticism, and spirituality were not adequate to express and account for the development of the person within religious life. Traditionally, of course, women religious often described themselves as "brides of Christ." Today, however, thanks to what we have learned from modern scriptural scholarship and the work of feminist Christian thinkers about the role of women in the early church, women religious have sought to reclaim their historical roles alongside "the twelve" as followers of Jesus, community leaders, and missionaries. Our directors introduced us to the basics of religious life: union with God in prayer, identity with the church, Scripture, the vows, mission and apostolate, community life. But we also read sociology, psychology, and literature. Along with our Vatican II documents and the Jerusalem Bible, we read Jung, historical novels, and poetry. Our retreats included the Psalms, but also meditative films about nature. There was a great effort to integrate our spiritual life with "real life." We came to identify ourselves with Mary, whom Jesus himself called "woman" in John's Gospel, and with Mary Magdalene, the first witness of the Resurrection; or with one of the healed women in the Gospel who goes out and tells others about her life-changing experience, and attracts others to come to Jesus too. It was a process that has served me and many others well, enabling women religious to create a whole body of self-explanatory narrative, reflection, and theological analysis.
Did it also accelerate a growing distrust between sisters and the episcopacy? That distrust has been present for a long time. In the late 1960s, after Los Angeles Cardinal James McIntyre ordered the Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary to get back into their habits and classrooms or get out of the diocese, the LCWR tried to address issues of women's ministerial equality. Later, in 1976, came Inter insigniores, the CDF's "definitive" rejection of the possibility of ordination for women. It shut down any formal discussion of women's equality in the church. For many women religious, the emphasis shifted then to social-justice concerns.
Since then, Rome has been busy shoring up its doctrinal barricades, and in the process has seemed intent on casting feminism into the outer darkness. Under John Paul II, the Vatican became enamored with a reading of Scripture and the tradition as calling on every woman to understand herself spiritually as "spouse." I find this at odds with the presentation of women in Scripture, and would point out that Jesus uses neither spousehood nor marriage as a model for discipleship. Quite the contrary. This reductionist anthropology, moreover, has become so arcane and removed from real life that much of what is written about how the church understands sexual symbolism has taken on a frankly gnostic character. Do we really want to limit our notions of the essential nature and meaning of embodiment to little more than the physical function of father and mother and the social relationship of bridegroom and bride, husband and wife? Again and again in recent years, this seems to be Rome's mantra. Particularly offensive was the 2004 Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women in the Church and the World, issued by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, which demeaned feminist theory as inimical to the common good of the church, the family, and society, and as the logical outcome of this analysis argued against women's ordination. In my opinion, his letter expressed a great deal of hostility to what women have attempted to say about themselves for the past forty years. It hardly encouraged dialogue.
What I sense today is that the Vatican will not budge in how it thinks theologically about what it means to be a woman; nor will it consider opening positions of real ecclesial authority to women. There is simply no getting away from the fact that in the Catholic Church it is men who tell women how they should understand themselves as women. Rome wants women religious to accept such understandings not merely without dissent, but without comment. The Vatican doesn't want independent-minded women theologians or biblical scholars, and seemingly won't read or quote them unless the women mimic the Vatican's—and that means men's—voice and views. But we are not "men" or "mankind." We are persons with minds and hearts and voices, who have lived lives of integrity and loyalty, and who remain loyal to this church, even when it treats us as second-class citizens and makes us beg for financial support in our old age.
Since Rome wants to know about the quality of my life as a religious sister, let me tell you about a common form of liturgical life in my community. At our cemetery we recently observed the gravesite rite for a deceased sister. No priest was there. One sister led the prayer, and another sprinkled holy water, while the rest of us made the responses. Few of sister's family members—nieces and nephews living many states away—were able to attend. In the end, we sisters are in effect the family, enacting one of the rights—called "suffrages after death"—that women religious have as a result of taking vows. Taking end-of-life responsibility for one another means a Catholic funeral, burial with your community members, and the prayers and remembrances of those with whom you "persevered unto death."
Earlier that day we had been lucky to find a kindly but frail eighty-plus priest to say the funeral Mass at the motherhouse. Priests' numbers have dropped, even in a metropolitan area like ours, and it's all "retired" priests can do to manage multiple Masses and pastoral services at some local parish. Consequently, women religious aren't at all assured of having daily Eucharist—the practice that grounded their spirituality for most of their lives as religious and one that is fundamental to their congregational constitutions. (Cardinal Rodé and his consultors would do well to ponder the relationship between Vatican policy and the "quality of life" of women religious: the refusal to ordain women has created a shortage of priests, and the quality of nuns' spiritual and sacramental life has suffered accordingly.)
Fortunately, despite the crisis in priesthood, there were men present to serve us in conducting our sister's last rituals on earth. I'm referring to the unionized cemetery crew. Until "the job moment," they awkwardly stood at the edge of our prayer circle. One in muddy Levis discreetly chewed gum. Another had a plastic water bottle jammed into a back pocket of his raggedy khakis. Not exactly vestments. Finally the "job moment" had come. Balancing on their grass-stained, thick-soled sneakers, the four men carefully coordinated the sets of tightly woven, three-inch-wide straps around the coffin. Two quickly pulled away the steel beams holding the coffin above the open grave. The coffin's weight shifted to the straps, and letting out the strap length evenly, fist over wrist, they skillfully lowered the coffin till it touched bottom.
Like other nuns, our deceased sister had put in many years of six-and-a-half-day work weeks, with lots of walking in the days before we drove cars. She had been a hospital nun, which meant that after her own shift ended, she would fill in on the floor for nurses who were sick. I recalled her at our dinner table. In her retirement years she had been careful about her diet, obsessively cutting off all fat from her meat. Nuns are self-effacing, and you never know all they did until you read their obituaries; but at the motherhouse you could always tell which had been hospital nuns. They were the fastest eaters at any table—a speed developed over years of eating in hospital dining rooms. You didn't linger when you had other nurses to supervise and patients to tend.
The cemetery crew didn't have to strain, since in her last illness our sister's body, always thin to begin with, had become weightless, like a ballet dancer's. We threw flowers down into the grave. Mine slipped into the narrow space between the coffin and the wall of earth. By her side, I thought.
Two hours earlier, standing at the open coffin before Mass, I'd read the signatures on her vow document, placing my hand on hers and silently thanking her for her life. Then two sisters had closed the coffin for the last time. Now, at the end of the litany, we invoked other sisters who had died, asking their help. "Pray for us," we murmured. This is the time to recall your friends: deceased sisters who mentored you; the one who offered you a shoulder to cry on or used her influence to help you; all those who gave you the example of persevering unto death through their own lives.
We sisters are buried with the paper we signed at final profession of vows, an event attested to by the superior and her vicar. The signatures on this sister's vows belonged to women elected as leaders a half-century before. I knew who they were. Their headstones could be found in the long line of graves that stretched out before us, rows and rows of nuns' graves, going back more than a century. I thought about cemeteries like this all over the United States, and the many thousands of nuns who faithfully served the church for a lifetime, building up its schools and hospitals. They kept their vows. They didn't cost the church $2 billion in legal settlements. Their gravestones don't memorialize ecclesial appointments, ministerial accomplishments, educational degrees, or elected congregational positions. For religious women, the headstone notes date of birth, religious name, date of profession of vows, and date of death. The facts of lifelong fidelity are simple and few.
Some years ago, with prudent foresight, my community bought up plots—enough of them to guarantee a place for me and for those likely to enter the community in the future. Mine is up the line a way. How far up is not under my control, though if I stay in good health and die of natural causes, it's probably a good way up. But here is the general area where you can expect to find me, long after the Vatican's visitation and investigation are over. The prospect of death and life in their full reach puts things in a frank perspective, and I end with the same question with which I began this essay: Is the Vatican visitation truly being done out of concern for American nuns? Here in the cemetery, I couldn't help but think that the question Rome is really asking is, "Why don't you have more nuns to bury? Why aren't there more of you?"
Do they really wonder why our numbers shrink and shrink? They might ponder their own actions. The visitation and investigation continue; the doctrinal assessment will ferret out our patches of heterodoxy. Standing at our late sister's grave I remembered, as if it were yesterday, a question she innocently asked me years ago in a group meeting. "Do we have rights?" she wondered. "What are they?"
Those were good questions then, and American sisters should ask them now. Meanwhile, as I glance up the line of graves, I wonder how many sisters will be here when the day comes to toss flowers on my coffin.
** This paragraph is a corrected version of the one that appeared in the print edition, which included an erroneous reference to an article by Sr. Sandra M. Schneiders.
Read Letters in response to this article: November 6, 2009, November 20, 2009, and December 3, 2009
About the Author
Sister X is a member of a congregation that belongs to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. This article was funded by a grant from the Henry Luce Foundation.
23 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
I thank Sister X for her article. Am sorry she did not feel confident enough to put her name to it. I wonder why. She seems to have concluded 'they are out to get us'. But perhaps as they say 'the are out to help us'. In an age that abhors obedience to any authority, it is easy to become paranoid about any one who raises a question about what we are doing. The Congregation is acting on behalf of the Pope who is the Superior of every religious order and congregation. Why not participate in the investigation? It is the sisters' chance to explain the route their congregation have followed post Vatican II. There has already been a thorough investigation of U.S. seminaries (re the drop in vocations). No one considered there was anything sinister in this. Certainly members of religious congregations did not raise their voices against it.
And by the way if the lawyers became interested in physical abuse in convent schools there would be a massive payout demanded of the sisters' congregations. I hear stories from adults who claim they were belted without mercy by particular sisters in their schools through the 40s to the 70s. But then from Australia, the U.S. legal system demanding such massive payouts for all sorts of things is considered idiotic in the extreme. Many of the active sisters' congregations, perhaps for very good reasons, are no longer living the religious life as it is understood in the church, but that of Secular Institutes. I wonder why they do not seek to transfer from the one to the other.
What a wonderfully written essay. I am ashamed at how our Church treats our women religious. I remember every so often a sister would come to our parish and have to "beg" for money. It is actually quite disgraceful. The work done by Roman Catholic women religious is heroic. I am very concerned about the visitation. It does seem like a way to intimidate/silence our sisters in Christ. I will keep you in my prayers and my budget.
Thank God my daughter decided not to become a sister, despite interviewing with a number of orders and staying with one for about six months. It was a long discernment process that ended in other choices that have proven very wise.
Sister X'a statement gives ample reason to understand why.
I believe Fr. Ronan has not a clue. How graceless of him to mention it in this context, but yes, there were abusive sisters. And brothers, priests and bishops. But one must ask where the sisters' toxic spirituality came from? Could it be ... the clergy who led them?
What I know is that there were brave sisters who spoke out with us as survivor advocates at the height of abuse scandal. Where were all those priests beyond a few noted individuals who have paid dearly for their visibility?
I recall back when the Retirement Fund for the Religous was established, there was an article in the Wall St. Journal about the financial straits of religous not having enough money to bury their dead, and facing real hardship. I remember vividly the response of a bishop about the matter, when he deadpanned that bishops would help, "not out of justice, but charity."
Really now? Having taken advantage of sisters' services at bottom level cost for decades, his episcopal self saw no need for social justice when it came to impinging on his own finances.
My heart goes out to Sister X and her colleagues. What are the productive choices for women who want to preserve their integrity, when power and control seem the foundational issues.
Father Ronan, full disclosure: I'm the sister of a U.S. nun in an active order who is well past the age when a layperson would retire, But she still has to work to help support her even older fellow sisters. I'm also the mother of a 35-year-old son who, at the age of 10, began training as an altar boy with a pastor who is now serving a life sentence for child rape. Had we not moved out of state for economic reasons mere weeks later, our son might have become another of his victims.
I don't doubt that to you the U.S. tort system looks strange. No such system is needed in countries which have universal health care, where anyone who needs medical attention receives it, no questions asked and no lawsuits. I'll never understand why our political factions who don't like so-called "greedy trial lawyers" don't support universal health care, since there'd be much less need for lawyers in the fields of personal injury and workers' compensation.
This, however, is an aside to your main point: why don't nuns welcome the scrutiny of the Vatican's spies, i.e., "apostolic visitors." Well, for starters: would you welcome some uninvited busybody underfoot in your rectory, expecting you to offer them free food and lodging out of your meager funds?
The U.S. Catholic Church has been happy to use the nuns' nearly-free labor, but now that so many nuns are too old and ill to work and their orders are destitute, the Church's attitude is, "Sorry, you're on your own." Some orders have occupied church-owned houses which were sold out from under them to pay legal fees and damages from pedophile-priest litigation. It was a layman, not a pope or bishop, who started the annual fund drive to aid retired religious.
The mission of these "apostolic visitors" was to judge the nuns' sincerity, using who knows what standards. The nuns know only that those standards were set by men, some halfway around the world, who have forfeited most of their own moral authority. They lost it not only in the pedophile scandals, but also in the way U.S. bishops have dog-whistled that Catholics who don't vote Republican are punching their tickets to hell. I'm happy that at long last the bishops are loudly objecting to budget proposals which pander to the tea party, slashing social programs while cutting taxes for the already wealthy; but for most Americans it's too little too late.
You call Sister X paranoid for using an alias, but paranoia is UN-reasonable fear. There's nothing unreasonable in fearing that the bishops are attacking nuns because they're desperate to find a scapegoat for declining U.S. church attendance. Incapable of looking in the mirror, they're fixating on old women who are the least able to defend themselves.
You say that since so many sisters in active orders "are no longer living the religious life as it is understood in the church," they ought to transfer to "Secular Institutes," whatever you mean by that. Well, deja vu all over again! We Yanks have seen that very sentiment, "America, Love It or Leave It," on bumper stickers since the Sixties, and it's baloney. The person who slaps that bumper sticker on his car doesn't own this country, and the all-male hierarchy do not, by virtue of their anatomy, own the Church.
Another slogan that fits on a bumper sticker, which I've heard a million times, is "The Church is not a democracy." I ask anyone who is so sure what the Church is NOT: can you define what it IS? Whatever it is, I dare say my sister and her fellow sisters are living the religious life far more truly than the priests and bishops who either sexually abused children or enabled the abusers.
There is at least a grain of truth in your borderline-misogynistic remark about nuns being held liable for abuse of their pupils, although you surely concede that few nuns, if any, ever committed rape. Frankly, I have less than fond memories of the nuns who taught me (none of them were my sister), but I have come to realize that they were stuck in the thankless job of trying to teach 40-50 children all day every day without a break, while wearing those dreadful wool habits even in hot weather, with wimples so starched that they couldn't turn their heads--and, I suspect, with little more guidance than platitudes like "God never gives you a burden too heavy for you to handle." I wonder, Father Ronan, how long you could have done the same without burning out.
Finally: you say the nuns should not object to being spied upon (dang, there I go again; I should have said "visited") since they did not object when seminaries were investigated. Can you really not understand the difference between the scrutiny of a candidate for the priesthood and of a woman who has been a nun for decades?
Fr Kilgannon
Having read your remarks I feel almost compelled to respond. Almost. However, the level of truly self-righteous, unhelpful condemnation your remarks contain stand quite well all on their own. If your remarks are an expression of your vision of Christ the best I can do is suggest new glasses.
You almost answered me but didn't, Father. Must be because name-calling takes up so much less time.
The least I would have expected from a priest is that you're glad my son did not become a victim of a pedophile and you're happy the perv is now in a place where he can't hurt any more children.
Fr Ronan.. I note you are not a subscriber. Go back to where you came from.
I went to Catholic elementary school in the 1950s. Yes, the nuns pulled my hair and slapped my face on more than one occassion. While those behaviors have long ceased to be acceptable, I never once thought I did not deserve these minor ways of disclipline, despite the fact that I would condemn them today. I have found memories of the Sisters of St. Joseph and many other sisters I have had the opportunity of knowing.
The comments from Fr. Ronan Kilganon is indicative of the problem the Roman Curia has caused. It is a narrative that is believed without remainder, not because it points to the truth, but because it lacks any sense of moral imagination. We live in a Church today where the hierarchy repeats the narrative:
> Us versus Them
> Good versus Evil
> Power and Authority versus Credibility
> Church as Magisterium versus Church as People of God
> Assenters versus Dissenters
> Doctrine without Error versus Humility of Understanding
> The Culture of Life versus the Culture of Death
> The Faithful versus the Unfaithful
I hope Commonweal will follow up on the information that Carl Andersen, an influential lawyer in Washington, D.C., a former member of the Reagan Administration and the head of the Knights of Columbus, is connected to this investigation into the LCWR.
As this is also an election year, and the national GOP has been obstructionist toward the current Administration since President Obama was elected, I believe it is especially important to determine whether the timing of this Vatican censure and investigation is tied in ANY WAY to keeping the sisters silent on issues of justice, peace and equality during this national presidential campaign.
Of course the issues involved extend far beyond our presidential election. But that does not mean they do not PRECLUDE an attempt by influential American clergy at the Vatican to INFLUENCE this election by sidelining the loyal opposition.
thank you, "sister x." your article brought me to tears and a great desire to sign my name as its author. namaste.
If todays nuns are publicaly taking stands in support of the taking of innocent human life then the vatican needs to "scrutunize" them and rein them in.A while ago I read an article here where the notion of intimacy-as in the intimate relation/connection between the mother and the fetus was invoked to take on the meaning that because there is such intimacy between the two[physicall dependency of the fetus with the mother ] then the mother could or should be allowed to decide to kill the fetus. This invoking of a concept like intimacy-connoting warmth,love,concern in a deep sense - was inverted to justify the reverse of love,warmth, deep concern for the other ,i.e. the destruction of the innocent human life. This is diametricaly oppossed to Christ and the doctrine of the Church and if nuns are toying with such an inversion of ethics then yes that warrants vatican intervention! [of course people can't help what they truely believe but to publically take a stand in such a matter of grave moral import -is to go against Christ and the Church and therefore is grounds for intervention by the church heirarchy.The nuns are undermining Jesus Christ and His Church on earth when they publicaly justify abortion.]
May God bless you, Sister X and reward you for your honesty. You and your Sisters are the healthiest people in the church - that's why they are investigating you. After everything that popes, bishops and priests have done - and not done - in recent years, it's the only way the old boys' network can avoid looking in the mirror.
Hang in there, Sister - you have the love and prayers of all of us disillusioned with the hierarchy and encouraged by you and the LCWR.
"I thank Sister X for her article. Am sorry she did not feel confident enough to put her name to it. I wonder why. She seems to have concluded 'they are out to get us'," commented Fr Ronan Kilgannon.
If Fr. Kilgannon read as far as the ninth paragraph of the article he would have found Sister X's well-stated rationale for not putting her name on what can only be described as a superb piece of work that should be required reading for all concerned with the future of Catholicism in America.
In her April 22, 2012, Chicago Sun-Times column "Vatican waging a war on nuns," <http://www.suntimes.com/news/marin/12026003-452/vatican-waging-a-war-on-nuns.html>, Carol Marin wrote: "Surely, there are thoughtful bishops who recoil at what the Vatican is doing here. Why they don't speak up, I will never know." I responded by writing: "Here's why: These thoughtful bishops, much like thoughtful college presidents at schools supporting big-time sports entertainment
businesses promoted by their trustees, enjoy their lofty positions. They must not only overlook related collateral damage, corruption, and cover-ups, but must also echo the party line, or at a minimum, keep silent in public as a matter of job security."
For additional insights on the Vatican crackdown on the LCWR, see "Doug Koesel, Cleveland Priest, Writes: What The Nuns' Story Is Really About," Huffington Post, June 1, 2012, <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/priest-writes-defense-of-nuns_n_1561271.html>.
The Vatican's bullying of America's women religious, aided and abetted by right-wing sycophants in the U.S. hierarchy and others (both religious and laity) currying favor with Rome, should come as no surprise to those who have had the opportunity to read Penny Lernoux's book People of God: The Struggle for World Catholicism (Penguin Books, 1989)and Garry Will's book Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit (Image Books, 2000).
With reference to my comment: "The Vatican's bullying of America's women religious, aided and abetted by right-wing sycophants in the U.S. hierarchy and others (both religious and laity) currying favor with Rome, should come as no surprise ...."
Among the both religious and laity currying favor with Rome are those likely affiliated with institutions closely aligned with the Vatican and its policies, for example,
o Opus Dei, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_Dei>,
o The Knights of Columbus, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_Columbus, and
o The American Association of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (a.k.a. the Knights of Malta and/or SMOM), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta. Also see "Their Will Be Done: Let the pope keep the kingdom and the glory -- the CIA wants the power" at <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/1983/07/their-will-be-done>.
With reference to my comment: "The Vatican's bullying of America's women religious, aided and abetted by right-wing sycophants in the U.S. hierarchy and others (both religious and laity) currying favor with Rome, should come as no surprise ...."
Among the both religious and laity currying favor with Rome are those likely affiliated with institutions closely aligned with the Vatican and its policies, for example,
o Opus Dei, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_Dei>,
o The Knights of Columbus, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_Columbus, and
o The American Association of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (a.k.a. the Knights of Malta and/or SMOM), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta. Also see "Their Will Be Done: Let the pope keep the kingdom and the glory -- the CIA wants the power" at <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/1983/07/their-will-be-done>.
It is troubling to think that the Vatican may have already unleashed the full range of its institutional power to do a corporate-like takeover of the LCWR so as to gain control of its assets; and, that it is doing so under false pretenses. That's the "why" for these additional comments.
Most likely, the Vatican would engage its conservative, right-wing organizations—The Knights of Malta, The Knights of Columbus, and Opus Dei—to work behind the scenes to help bully the LCWR to submission. Generally speaking, these organizations have a blind reverence for obedience to authority, a penchant for secrecy, and adhere to John Paul II's counter-Vatican II, no-dissent dictum, "the church is not a democracy."
Sadly, most men who join the Knights of Columbus and Opus Dei are only permitted to see the organization's charitable/benevolent front. Thus they have no clue that they are being manipulated and used to achieve the organization's political and economic goals. They truly believe they are doing God's work, in this case helping to get the ostensibly wayward American nun's in line. On the other hand, the exclusive and very affluent membership of the elite Knights of Malta has much more than a clue as to what this powerful organization is about and what it is doing.
For an example of the rhetoric used to undermine the LCWR's position, see "Catholic Church is not a democracy," at<http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120609/discuss/706099979/>. This letter was in response to my wife's and my May 26, 2012, letter, "Church stance on women hurts itself," <http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120526/discuss/705269908/>.
"For an example of the rhetoric used to undermine the LCWR's position, see "Catholic Church is not a democracy," at<http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120609/discuss/706099979/>."
The following response was submitted June 10, the day after the letter was published in the Daily Herald:
Dictatorial papacy makes unjust demands on American nuns
"A vow of obedience is just that — obey all commands of the church, not just the ones with which you agree," wrote Bob Lowth in his June 9, response, "Catholic Church is not a democracy," to our May 26, letter, "Church's stance on women hurts itself."
As those convicted at the post WW II Nuremberg trials found, oaths of obedience as a basis for obeying the unjustifiable commands of a dictator were no basis for a defense of their crimes against humanity.
It is troubling to think that the Vatican has unleashed its awesome institutional power to apostolically rape the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) via an unwanted and unjustified corporate takeover to gain control of its assets.
Also, the church's ultraconservative, right-wing organizations are likely working behind the scenes to help bully the LCWR to submission. These organizations are characterized by blind reverence to holy obedience, a penchant for secrecy, and strict adherence to John Paul II's no-dissent dictum, "the church is not a democracy," voiced as he crushed supporters of Second Vatican Council (Vatican II) documents and Pope John XXIII's aggiornamento—"binging up to date"—thinking.
Most members of these organizations are only permitted to see its benevolent front — having no clue that they are being used to achieve the church's economic and political goals. They truly believe they are doing God's work, in this case helping to get the ostensibly wayward American nun's in line.
The Lowth letter is an excellent example of the rhetoric used to undermine the position of the LCWR that has refused to bow to the unjust demands of a dictatorial papacy determined to mute John XXIII's call to "reestablish the principle of shared authority with all the church's members" and to eliminate all vestiges of Vatican II in the American Catholic Church.
Frank and Judy Splitt
Mount Prospect
The Roman Catholic Church can be said to be Janus-faced in the sense that it reveals contrasting characteristics and behavior patterns. Its intended outward, public face is that of a holy and benevolent organization that serves to guide its faithful members, both lay and religious, on a path of faith and good works to life eternal with God their creator
On the other hand, the inward, private face is that of an international corporation that operates with a set of rigid orthodoxy- policed rules and regulations that exclude dissent. The corporation is managed by an autocratic CEO whose faithful stockholders believe is infallible, a Board of Directors the members of which are necessarily-dedicated CEO loyalists who manage special offices, and a multitude of geographically arranged divisions and branches that operate in strict accordance with the corporation's our-way-or-the-highway rules and regulations
Re: "....an autocratic CEO whose faithful stockholders believe is infallible," consider the following question:
Were John XXIII, who convened Vatican II with a call to bring the Catholic Church up to date, and Pius VI, who continued the Council and instituted its reforms, acting infallibly in their Vatican II related words and actions or is it John Paul II and Benedict XVI who been infallible in their concerted efforts to undo the work of John XXIII, Paul VI, and the Council Fathers?
What is the LCWR and Catholics to make of these mutually exclusive positions? The church can't have it both ways…but sadly it does. The church's management is what it is. What it will be in the future is up to the Holy Spirit and the People of God
Autocratic ceo's,blind obedience to authority, nazi like mindset like at the nurnberg trials, anti vatican council right wingers etc., etc.,blah ,blah blah. Cast aspersions all you want -The LCWR in choosing to remain silent about the issue of abortion warrants action by the vatican.If catholic nuns cannot see that the killing of unborn human life is morally repugant and contrary to the teaching of Jesus Christ and christian theology-then they have lost their way.On that issue and that issue alone is sufficient reason for vatican intervention .
Playing the Abortion Card
rose-ellen caminer played the abortion card in her May 23 and June 16, 2012 posts. In the latter post she wrote: '"The LCWR in choosing to remain silent about the issue of abortion warrants action by the vatican.If catholic nuns cannot see that the killing of unborn human life is morally repugant and contrary to the teaching of Jesus Christ and christian theology-then they have lost their way.On that issue and that issue alone is sufficient reason for vatican intervention."
It appears that Caminer, presupposes that Catholic nuns must somehow be blind to the morally complex issues surrounding abortion. Most likely the nuns are heeding the advice of St. Augustine, to wit:
"When a thing is obscure in itself defeats our capacity, and nothing in Scripture comes to our aid, it is not safe for humans to presume they can pronounce on it."
This advice is often ignored by celibate Popes and their likewise celibate sycophantic curial prefects who are not only removed and disengaged from the realities of life, but also should know that neither Jesus nor the Scriptures addressed this and other "bedroom" issues that seem to permeate their thinking and pronouncements.
Also, see Carol Marin's May 25, 2012, Chicago Sun-Times' op-ed, "The silence of the nuns," <http://www.suntimes.com/news/marin/12773866-452/the-silence-of-the-nuns.html>.
The brutality of partial birth abortion has nothing to do with the bedroom.Nor does upholding the sanctity of human life from the moment of conception.The notion that the creator of the universe and of humans,Jesus Christ, who made us in His image -would condone the destruction of defenseless innocent humans by more powerful ones for the material benefit of the powerful ones-strikes me as the antithesis of what it can possibly mean to follow Christ.
"The protection of life is a seamless garment. You can't protect some life and not others."--Eileen Egan (1912-2008)
Eileen Egan's phrase "the seamless garment" is said to have come from a phrase used by St. John the Apostle to represent a consistent, unbroken reverence for the sacredness of life. True adherents to this principle are not only opposed to abortion but also to other transgressions against life such as euthanasia, assisted suicide, and killing in war, as well as torture, economic injustice and capital punishment.
One such adherent was the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, then archbishop of Chicago and the incoming chairman of the U.S. bishops' pro-life activities committee, when he delivered the December 1983, Gannon Lecture at Fordham University. He called for a "consistent ethic of life" approach to moral issues. See "A Consistent Ethic of Life: An American-Catholic Dialogue, at http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bernardingannon.html.
The leadership in the Catholic Church believes that life begins at conception and that it is too sacred to end it prematurely. However, to advocate only against birth prevention and abortion and not any of other life-related activities is not only hypocritical, but also smacks of cherry-picking advocacy that is often used by ultraconservatives to dismiss progressives as Cafeteria Catholics.
For the latest on the Vatican's hostile takeover of the LCWR, see the Editorials and related comments in the June 22--July 05, 2012 , issue of the National Catholic Reporter, to wit:
o "Clash between LCWR and bishops about culture, not theology," at http://ncronline.org/news/women-religious/editorial-clash-between-lcwr-and-bishops-about-culture-not-theology,
o "Bishops' move against women religious a hard sell, indeed, by Tom Fox, http://ncronline.org/news/women-religious/bishops-move-against-women-religious-hard-sell-indeed
Thank you, Ellen O'Brien. You have said what I, too, believe to be a large part of the reason this turmoil has been put into place. I applaud the Nuns on the Bus group for speaking out for those who have no voice! I am confident that silencing the sisters has not been very successful!!!
I am confident that silencing the sisters has not been very successful!!
The only true measure of 'success' of course, will be salvation. Quoting Mother Theresa, "We are not called to be successful, only holy."
Based upon a model nun/future saint, shouldn't the only quesiton we should all be asking, both religious and non religious, is "Are we holy?"
All the rest is fluff.


text:
- 6 Henchbots with 5 weapons aiming to stop you in your tracks
- Bonus rooms and first aid kits to discover keys and replenish health
- 8 chapters to play through with different enemies in 5 various locations making 40 exhilarating levels to conquer!
Captain Greasebeard and his evil Henchbots are determined to take over Vile Isle, and it's up to you to save the innocent and destroy the evil swashbucklers in Pirate Blast. Destroy as many of the Captain's Henchbots as possible, and fight your way to the end to face off with Greasebeard himself. Restor order and defeat Captain Greasebeard or find yourself walking the plank, matey.
|Submitted by
|Cheat Title
Review This Game

subset: commoncrawl


text:
No comments posted. |E-mail|Print | Text Size | Bookmark
Wolcott Tech, O'Brien Tech football building for the future
Wolcott Tech football coach Jamie Coty and O'Brien Tech coach Nick Aprea have plenty in common. They both are guiding relatively young varsity football programs, Coty in his fifth season in charge of the Wildcats and Aprea in only his first season of the Condors, who began as a varsity program in 2011.
Wolcott Tech (2-7) hosts Abbott Tech on Thursday at 10 a.m. at the Torrington Middle School while O'Brien Tech (1-8) visits Platt Tech at Jonathan Law of Milford at 10:30 a.m. in the season finales.
Both schools have had to deal with facility issues this fall.
In Ansonia, O'Brien finally played a home game at the high school this year while most of the home games have been at Shelton High. Next year, the school's complex is scheduled to undergo a facelift.
In Torrington, Wolcott Tech's practices and home games have been moved to the Pop Warner field at the middle school while the high school field is being renovated.
"It's been tough every day, especially after daylight savings time when it starts getting dark at around 4 p.m. We need to hustle to get stuff in," said Coty. "It hasn't been easy."
But Coty, a former player at Wilby High, doesn't fret.
"We'll keep plugging away and do the best we can," said the coach, who guided the Wildcats to their second win this season, 45-42 over O'Brien Tech.
"With about 25 seconds left in the game, Shane Celone recovered an onside kick, and thankfully, we came away with the win," said Coty. "There's been a lot of excitement, especially over the second half of the year. We knew the first part of our schedule would be tough with
See TECH, Page 5C
Prince Tech (38-6 loss), Bullard Havens (47-0 loss) and Capital Prep-Classical (42-7 loss). The Hartford and Bridgeport schools have a lot of talent and sheer speed."
But things started to turn in the favor of the Wildcats in Week 5 when Platt Tech led Wolcott Tech only by 8-0 at halftime.
"Historically, any time we have played Platt Tech, we've been beaten badly, but this time we lost 22-0 and their coaches praised us, saying how tough we were as a team," said Coty.
A week later, the Wildcats beat first-year vasity Whitney Tech of Hamden, 49-6, and two weeks later they led Cheney Tech of Manchester in the third quarter.
"We had some turnovers late and lost (38-18), but we did play well," Coty said. "After the Platt Tech and Cheney games, the kids said they were pleased with their effort, but were not into moral victories. I said that there was nothing wrong with that and they should want to see success on the scoreboard."
The bottom line is Coty is seeing progress.
"We've moved the ball on every team, and we led in four games," said Coty.
The Wildcats are led by senior tri-captains Celone, a right offensive guard and middle linebacker; Cody Dallavalla, a left guard and defensive end, and Mike Sullivan, a running back and linebacker.
"I want to see this program succeed, and I really believe we are getting close," Coty said. "We have 17 or 18 freshmen, and the kids have stuck around. We have really good numbers and if we have good offseason of training, next year could be a very good year."
Aprea is hopeful, too. The Condors have 41 players and expect to return at least 31 with a nucleus of sophomores.
The two senior co-captains are Matt Gomulinski, a right offensive guard and defensive tackle, and Joe Fernandes, a wide receiver and defensive back.
"The experience has been great, I can honestly say," said Aprea. "When the school renovations are complete, that will bode well for the future. Future students will want to come here and know that we have a football program. We won't be able to take the next step until that happens. But I am excited about the future. The gridiron club has really gotten things going, and they're the lifeline of the program."
In a year's time, Apea has seen the excitement build, saying there was a buzz around the building.
"But like with everything else, things fade away and it is up to us to win and be successful," said Aprea. "We're getting a lot of compliments from opposing coaches on the kind of product we are putting on the field. I think we are doing a pretty good job even though our record doesn't show it."
Reader Comments
The following are comments from online readers like you. In no way do they represent the view of The Republican-American.
Submit a Comment
We encourage your feedback and dialog.
Please be civil and respectful.
Registered users comments will be posted automatically.
All other comments will be reviewed by our staff before appearing on the Web site.
If you're witty, to the point and quotable, your reader comments may also be included on the Around the Towns page of The Sunday Republican.
Redzone News
Redzone Videos
Redzone Blog
XML_Parser: undefined entity at XML input line 8:18
Photo Galleries


text:
6 Reasons Homemade Porn is a Worse Idea Than You Think
So you just watched Chyna's muscular, pocky heiny get befouled by a greasy little man, and you're pretty confident that you could wrangle up an inebriated girl with five kids and low self-esteem who might want to make a movie too. That's awesome. I've pondered it too but any time I bring the idea up it's generally met with revulsion. Apparently Internet comedy CHUDs just aren't made for film. But the idea is still a good one, right?
Thanks to a string of C-list celebrities and low-budget websites, the idea of a home sex tape is now more reasonable than ever. Who would turn down a chance to hump on camera? Not me. Not you. Not anyone. But let this be a warning to you: Some things do not belong on camera.
#6. You are No Porn Star
For some reason real porn makes us want to make amateur porn. But look at amateur porn. Look at Screech for God's sake. Like a malnourished, shaven orangutan, he brings nothing to the table. In real porn, actors and actresses are chosen from the finest broken homes in the Midwest and given top of the line plastic surgery and full body make up. Have you ever heard of asshole bleaching? Porn stars do that. A porn star is so dedicated to their job that, when given some constructive criticism on set like, "Hey, Starla, I noticed your anus is looking a bit on the dingy side, maybe look into that?" they make a mental note to visit the ass bleaching salon later in the day and have a stranger apply some manner of pigment-reducing spackle to their crapper. Right on the hole.
While their asses look like sparkling puckers of sanitation and delight, fashioned from the finest alabaster and stank, mine looks like the Sarlacc that ate Boba Fett. It has no business on camera and chances are yours will be just as atrocious. You could always bend over in front of a mirror and try to gauge where yours stands, but you'll probably need at least one other present for a comparison. In the end you'll probably just depress yourself.
Other areas you may want to reconsider showing on camera include the underside of your sack, the front of your sack, any parts of you covered in hair and the back of your head if you have one of those weird skin folds. You know those things? It's like a dinner roll of head flesh. Just off putting, that is.
#5. Porn Sex isn't Real Sex
The thing about porn sex is that it's designed specifically to be filmed. Like have you ever noticed how often dudes get into the most horribly uncomfortable looking positions? That's to accommodate a sweaty man with a large camera who wants to perform an unlicensed colonoscopy or some other manner of internal review with a fish-eye lens. So we're given a wide array of shots and angles that necessitate the performers humping around corners and engaging in visually stunning but horribly unfulfilling maneuvers.
True story: Back in aught-6 I was inspired after viewing some adult cinema to try sex standing up. Like the kind where you just pick the woman right up and hold her there like some kind of bag of hump potatoes. What was I thinking? I work at a computer all day, my whole body has atrophied to pudding. To this day my back has not healed and there's still a dent in the drywall from my head.
Porn inspires you to do stupid sex. Sex that doesn't really feel good but we're convinced is awesome because porn stars seem to love it. But you could give a porn star $20 and a sandwich and she'd fake an orgasm over Weetabix. And it'd be wild too. She'd call Weetabix a whore and tell it to spank her. Wish I had some Weetabix...
You break out the camera and you think you're going to capture unchained passion but really you're probably just going to catch your goodie bag jiggling like a cat toy made from bologna.
#4. You Have Poor Equipment
Some people like amateur porn because of its "grittiness"; which is like enjoying authentic Central American water for the dysentery. Porn has to have some quality for it to be good. Real porn is on a sound stage, or at least some dude's backyard, there's lighting and sound equipment and the camera probably didn't come from the Wal-Mart electronics department.
Have you ever been in a public restroom when an overweight man in a hurry comes in? And you're forced to take the next stall and just sit in silent horror and listen as he tries to both get comfortable and stave off an aneurysm? Why is there is much heavy breathing? And squishing? And then wet plops. That's what homemade porn sounds like.
Lighting is one of the most underappreciated aspects of filmmaking. If not for lighting, those pristine, fake boobies that make legit porn so enthralling would look like the decrepit peaks of Mordor. But they don't, do they? No sir, they look delightful. But under your Simpsons novelty lamp they and your ass are going to look flatter than piss on a plate and marred with creeping black shadows.


text:
Make your wedding experience memorable, starting with a trip to Elda's Bridal Boutique. Experience Elda's personal service at its best. From the moment you first come in and choose your dress to picking up your dress before your wedding, we are here for you.
Elda's Bridal Boutique has been family owned and operated for over 20 years. We give you personal service and special attention - be you the bride, mothers of the bride and groom, bridesmaids, or those attending other formal occasions.
With a variety of dresses, you're sure to find what you're looking for. So whether having an informal beach wedding or a formal church wedding, you'll find the dress of your dreams. Our dresses range in price points and can accommodate various budgets.
Our professional staff is here for you to receive 1-on-1 personal service. Our service is one of a kind, making every client feel special. Visit Elda's Bridal Boutique today at 1100 W. New Haven Ave., West Melbourne, or call us at 321-984-7192 for an appointment.
|Designer Bridal Sale
10% to 50%
off Samples
|Call for Details
Girls Night Out
Call for
|The Knot Best of Weddings 2010 & 2012
|Congratulations Elda's Bridal Boutique The Best in Weddings as Voted by Local Brides
|Elda's Bridal Boutique Facebook Video Link


text:
Methylation on gene-body and 3'UTRs if copied to mRNA can potentially regulate post-transcription modifications or expression regulation. But I'm not sure if they are maintained after transcription or if they get all de-novo methylation.
I don't believe anything should change in the majority of DNA->RNA transcription. DNA methylation typically occurs on the non-watson crick side of Cytosine so it shouldn't affect the base-pairing.
However, there are a few hypothetical situations that would result in alterations of the transcribed RNA. The sponatneous deamination of the 4' amine would convert the base into uracil. If there is an additional 5' methyl, the 5-methyluracil would be recognized as Thymine.
(edit) I've talked with several genomics folks about this topic and it turns out that M5Cytosine is very resistant to deamination due to the presence of the Methyl group. As a result, the instance that I have just described is actually very rare.
5mCytosine to Thymine deamination
The other situation would be to errors in DNA proofreading. Does the 5mCytosine affect the fidelity of RNA polymerase? I honestly don't know but it would be worth examining.
There is an article in PNAS Conservation and divergence in eukaryotic DNA methylation who used:
So there is some conservation.


text:
From his childhood fascination with the gigantic Natural History Museum model of a blue whale, to his abiding love of Moby-Dick, to his adult encounters with the living animals in the Atlantic Ocean, the acclaimed writer Philip Hoare has been obsessed with whales. The Whale is his unforgettable and moving attempt to explain why these strange and beautiful animals exert such a powerful hold on our imagination.
About the Author
Philip Hoare is the author of biographies of Stephen Tennant and Noel Coward and the historical studies Wilde's Last Stand, Spike Island and England's Lost Eden. He is also the writer and presenter of the BBC Arena film, The Hunt for Moby-Dick. He lives in Southampton, England.
Praise For…
"Genius … THE WHALE (is) a rhapsodic mediation on all things cetacean. Hoare is always on the lookout for the revealing detail. He also has a finely tuned sense of perspective and pacing."
-Nathaniel Philbrick, New York Times Book Review
"[Hoare's] work is rigorous, something every serious student of whales--and, more widely conceived, of the natural world--will want to have at hand."
-Washington Post
"Hoare is a splendid writer and a beguiling guide. I found the spell (he) casts powerful and difficult to shake."
-Cleveland Plain Dealer
"You don't have to love Moby Dick to love this book. But if you do, THE WHALE is probably one of the most sublime reading experiences you'll have this year."
-NPR's All Things Considered
"A love letter to the 'largest, loudest, oldest' mammal ever to have existed, Brit biographer Hoare's book romps through science, history and literature to chronicle his obsession with the mighty whale. Salted with astounding facts (the calls of blue whales were one mistaken for earthquakes), this is an exhilarating valentine."
"Philip Hoare's THE WHALE is everything you want from a book. It is unpredictable and amusing and informative and original, cavorting between biology, history, travel writing, and memoir with an engaging sense of the subject's charisma. And the book is even handsome."
-Mark Kurlansky, author of SALT and COD
"This singular, magnificent book inspires both awe and shame—awe of the whales, shame of the human species that has tried to destroy them. In the end, Hoare's virtuosic sympathy for his subject makes you believe in the better angels of our nature."
-Alex Ross, bestselling author of THE REST IS NOISE
"Philip Hoare's writing is quite untrammelled by convention and opens up astonishing views at every turn."
-W.G. Sebald
"A wonderful read!... Hoare magnificently weaves together his own experiences with stories about literary giants whose writings were inspired by whales—Melville, Hawthone, and Thoreau—and he captures the utter beauty, size, and power of the whale."
-Lynne Cox, author of GRAYSON
"A love letter to the 'largest, loudest, oldest' mammal ever to have existed....Salted with astounding facts...this is an exhilarating valentine."


text:
Make cake doughnuts
|To coat doughnuts completely with confectioners' sugar, shake them with the sugar inside a brown paper lunch bag. Add 2 doughnuts, shake gently to coat, and transfer to a platter. Repeat with remaining doughnuts and doughnut holes. (Eve Bishop/Newsday/MCT)
Although I'll never turn down a yeast-raised doughnut, I prefer doughnuts leavened with baking powder and baking soda. Yeast doughnuts have a light, bubbly crumb, the result of large air pockets that form during fermentation. Cake doughnuts are dense, sweet, and a little bit crumbly - just like cake. It doesn't hurt that cake doughnuts can be made on impulse and cooked off right away, while yeast-raised doughnuts can take hours to rise. What real doughnuts, whether yeast-raised or cake-style, have in common: They're always deep-fried, never baked.
Making cake doughnut dough is as simple as mixing dry and wet ingredients. For a tender result, take care not to overmix the dough, and roll it out quickly and gently. To shape cake doughnuts, you'll need a doughnut cutter, which you can find near the cookie cutters at a housewares shop. You'll also need a deep pot and the courage to fry.
Choose a bland vegetable oil with a high smoking point, the temperature at which oil begins to break down. Safflower and canola oil are both good picks.
For safety's sake, make sure your pot is no more than halfway full of oil. Attach a deep-fat thermometer to the side. Heat the oil to 375 degrees.
Don't drop the doughnuts into the pot.
Lower them carefully with tongs or a slotted spoon to avoid spattering. When the doughnuts are added to the oil, it should drop in temperature to about 360 degrees, which is just right.
Cook only a few at a time, checking the oil temperature during cooking and before you add a new batch, and adjusting the flame as necessary.
Use a slotted spoon or frying basket to transfer them to a paper towel-lined rack to drain and cool.
Make sure the paper towels are far from the flame.
Finishing your cake doughnuts is a matter of preference. For some people, nothing is more delicious than a naked doughnut fresh from the fryer. If this is you, wait 5 minutes to allow the doughnuts to cool and drain.
If eaten immediately, they will still be doughy inside. As they cool slightly, they will cook to completion.
If you like some crunchy sweetness, coat your doughnuts in sugar while they are still warm, let them cool, then coat them again. Wait until the doughnuts are completely cooled to coat them in confectioners' sugar, or the sugar will melt.
Likewise, glaze doughnuts (use 1 cup of confectioners' sugar mixed with 2 tablespoons milk) only after they have come to room temperature.
Vegetable oil for frying
2 cups unbleached all-purpose flour
½ cup sugar
1 ½ teaspoons ground cardamom
1 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon baking powder
½ teaspoon baking soda
¼ teaspoon ground cinnamon
2 tablespoons unsalted butter, melted
½ cup sour cream, room temperature
2 tablespoons milk
1 large egg, room temperature
1 cup confectioners' sugar (optional)
1. Pour 2 to 3 inches of oil into a deep pot or large Dutch oven. The oil shouldn't fill more than half of the pot. Attach a thermometer to the side of the pan so it dips into the oil. Heat over medium until it reaches 375 degrees. Set wire rack over a rimmed baking sheet. Place two layers of paper towels on top of rack.
2. While the oil heats, combine the flour, sugar, cardamom, salt, baking powder, baking soda and cinnamon in a large mixing bowl. Add the butter and mix on low with an electric mixer until the mixture resembles coarse meal. Add sour cream, milk and egg, and mix until a dough forms.
3. Roll dough to ¼-inch thickness. Use doughnut cutter to cut into 12 doughnuts and 12 doughnut holes. Fry doughnuts in oil, 3 or 4 at a time, turning once, until golden on both sides. Transfer cooked doughnuts to rack to drain and cool. Repeat with remaining doughnuts and holes, monitoring oil carefully and adjusting heat to maintain a cooking temperature of 360 degrees.
4. Place confectioners' sugar in a brown paper bag. Add 2 doughnuts, shake gently to coat, and transfer to a platter. Repeat with remaining doughnuts and doughnut holes. Serve immediately. Makes 12 doughnuts and 12 doughnut holes.
Follow Us
Post a reader commentWe encourage your feedback and dialog.
Please be civil and respectful.
If you're witty, to the point and quotable, your reader comments may also be included on the Around the Towns page of The Sunday Republican.
Readers must be registered and logged in to post comments on the site. Registration is free. Click Here to register.
A Subscription is not required to post comments only a Registration.
Log In
|Register / Forgotten Password?
- On Nutrition: Changes get noticed as new year begins
- Lifesize weight-control system takes measure of portion control
- 2013 food trends: What's the next kale?
- Tailor your treadmill workouts to include a lot of variety and safety
- Microbiome Project: 'We are 90% bacteria'
- Rockette plan
- Israeli law aims to make ultrathin models obsolete
- Dried and true
- A peek at our robotic future
- Billboard seeking kidney nets chain of giving


text:
In traditional DH one chooses two shared parameters: a large prime "p" and base "g", which is primitive root mod "p". Suppose generation algorithm is broken and "g" generates only a subgroup (group with less elements than number of coprimes to "p"), what could be the possible attack ? what's the complexity ? are there any real-world examples of attacking wrong DH parameters (implementation) ?
migrated from security.stackexchange.com Aug 28 '13 at 6:56
This question came from our site for information security professionals.
As far as we know, Diffie-Hellman is secure as long as the subgroup generated by g is impervious to discrete logarithm. When working modulo a prime p, this is achieved when the following are met:
Note that it is in no way necessary that g generates all non-zero integers modulo p. It is fine if it generates a strict subgroup, as long as that subgroup cannot be split into several subgroups, each being very small. This is the essence of the necessity of at least one medium-sized prime q in the factorization of the subgroup order t.
The order of g, called t above, is a divisor of p-1. With overwhelming probability, a randomly generated g will imply an order which will not be much smaller than p. Indeed, there is only one chance in a billion to hit a g which implies an order t smaller than p by more than 30 bits (because 230 is about one billion). It is preposterous to imagine that a random g, modulo a 1024-bit prime p, will imply a subgroup order smaller than 900 bits.
The biggest prime factor of a random integer of n bits will have length, on average, about 0.3*n. It is extremely improbable that the biggest prime factor will be much shorter than that.
Bottom-line is that a purely random prime p (of at least 1024 bits) and a purely random g modulo p will be fine. To get bad DH parameters, you have to do it on purpose.
However, some people are arguing for ensuring that p and g are fine with "stronger" arguments than the probabilistic properties explained above (mathematically, these probabilities are extremely strong, but convincing people is not only about mathematics, but also about psychology). First, p will be generated as a "nothing up my sleeve" number with a completely open and fully described pseudo-random generator. See appendix A of FIPS 186-4 for an illustration (this is for DSA, but it may apply to DH as well). Then there are two ways for g:
When the whole process is fully described, as in Appendix A of FIPS 186-4, it can be verified, which guarantees against DH parameters which have been made weak on purpose.


text:
Today in Tweet Beat, fellow comedians get somber over Greg Giraldo's death, and Teresa Giudice denies reported feud with her sister-in-law. Plus, an update on Lil Wayne's prison release.
RIP Greg Giraldo. Belly-laugh hilarious, prolific, good & kind. A thousand oys can't express
Greg Giraldo passed away today. This is the last photo of us together, taken June 28 at Noam's wedding. RIP buddy. http://yfrog.com/497tqrj
Greg Giraldo may you RIP. My thoughts & prayers go to his family, friends & fans.
Just went way out of my way not to drive past Laugh Factory. If I see Giraldo's name on that marquee, gonna lose it.
Greg Giraldo RIP. Be careful with scripts, don't mix with alcohol and fully research pills online before you take anything.
greg giraldo. the world has lost a brilliant mind. i was very fortunate to watch greg at the laugh factory many times. he was gutbusting.RIP
Don't believe the fake feud rumors. I'm fine if any of my family members—SILs, cousins, secret nephews—or friends join cast b/c I ♥ them.
& no I don't have a nanny—neither does Jacqueline btw—and I have NO problem if you do. My SIL has had a nanny for years. I just don't. xx
Damnnn...I had a magarita last night & my head is pounding! It was a BIG one, but geez...see this is why I stick to WINE!
A Brigadier asked if I have my own set of every Marvel comicbook. Hey, if I did I'd be able to buy Twitter, instead of merely using it!
I advocate not wasting a precious moment of life fighting your body & your love of food!
When did skinny become the new brilliant?!
Not sure what it says about me as a person that I am obsessed with reading about straight people obsessed with gay people.
Gay Teens: You are SO much more interesting than those who bully you. Don't leave us with a world full of homophobic predators.
35 days until they #FreeWeezy - http://bit.ly/Freeweezy


text:
13 Jul 2011 8:35 PM #11
hi ed, sure.
ext 3.4 version:
reconfigure : function(store, colModel){ var rendered = this.rendered; if(rendered){ if(this.loadMask){ this.loadMask.destroy(); this.loadMask = new Ext.LoadMask(this.bwrap, Ext.apply({}, {store:store}, this.initialConfig.loadMask)); } } if(this.view){ this.view.initData(store, colModel); } this.store = store; this.colModel = colModel; if(rendered){ this.view.refresh(true); } this.fireEvent('reconfigure', this, store, colModel); },
reconfigure: function(store, columns) { var me = this, headerCt = me.headerCt; if (me.lockable) { me.reconfigureLockable(store, columns); } else { if (columns) { headerCt.suspendLayout = true; headerCt.removeAll(); headerCt.add(columns); } if (store) { store = Ext.StoreManager.lookup(store); me.bindStore(store); } else { me.getView().refresh(); } if (columns) { headerCt.suspendLayout = false; me.forceComponentLayout(); } } me.fireEvent('reconfigure', me); }
defaults : { align : 'left', width : 100 }
defaults : { align : 'center', width : 200 }
so, to not break compatibility i suggest that you make the 2nd param optional: columns / colModel and check if it is an array or not.
best regards
14 Jul 2011 4:09 PM #12
Right, but there is no ColumnModel in 4.x - it's just an array of columns... it doesn't sound like the architecture supports what you're asking for hereExt JS Senior Software Architect
Personal Blog: http://edspencer.net
Twitter: http://twitter.com/edspencer
Github: http://github.com/edspencer
15 Jul 2011 12:53 AM #13
hi ed, it does
Ext.grid.header.Container is exactly the old columnModel.
In the first releases of ext 4, it was only possible to specify an array of columns when creating a grid. Later on (beta3+, don't know for sure) it was also allowed again to set the "colModel" directly:
initComponent: function() { var me = this, scroll = me.scroll, vertical = false, horizontal = false, headerCtCfg = me.columns || me.colModel,
maybe it should also be renamed to headerCt (or headerCt back to colModel which makes more sense imho).
so, the most important point is only the reconfigure method and checking for an array or headerCt should be really easy to implement
best regards
15 Jul 2011 12:57 AM #14
Ok - if that's the case we'll do it. I asked Aaron to check out this threadExt JS Senior Software Architect
Personal Blog: http://edspencer.net
Twitter: http://twitter.com/edspencer
Github: http://github.com/edspencer
29 Jul 2011 1:45 AM #15
Hi Ed,
I've got a question related to the original problem. I have a grid whose list of columns is dynamic. So every time I change the columns in the grid I call grid.reconfigure to change the store and the list of columns. I create a new store every time the columns change, but what should I do about the model for the new store?
I see two options:
1) create a new model with a dynamically generated name each time I need a new column list. I understand that using the model is the suggested way of doing such stuff in ExtJS4, but still having so many dynamic models which are not used later seems rather silly
2) use the 'fields' property of the store, whenever creating the new store, which seems cleaner but not recommended by Sencha...
What do you think?
Thanks and best regards,
29 Jul 2011 10:26 AM #16
Using fields in the Store is totally ok for thisExt JS Senior Software Architect
Personal Blog: http://edspencer.net
Twitter: http://twitter.com/edspencer
Github: http://github.com/edspencer
31 Jul 2011 11:13 PM #17
22 Sep 2011 3:55 AM #18
23 Sep 2011 1:10 AM #19
Hi diablo,
I need also some "dynamic" models into my application.
# how can you modify a the already defined model relations: i.e. adding a new field to a existent model=
this.fields.add('FieldName',Ext.create('Ext.data.Field',{name:'FieldName', ...}));
11 Nov 2011 12:30 PM #20
dynamic model for existing store
Hi edspencer,
I am creating store for my chart. And I have to update store's model before I am reloading the store.
Please let me know the way to do show.
I have used setModel() method to update store model but its not reflecting after store reload.
Any help appreciated.
Thread Participants: 24
- tobiu (3 Posts)
- Sesshomurai (1 Post)
- ajaxvador (1 Post)
- faruq (3 Posts)
- jash (1 Post)
- klodoma1 (4 Posts)
- diablo (1 Post)
- meyersd (1 Post)
- edspencer (8 Posts)
- jmCodinach (1 Post)
- torres10 (1 Post)
- börn (1 Post)
- mickarea (1 Post)
- Chris.Schick (1 Post)
- julien.meyer (1 Post)
- pmachner (2 Posts)
- email@example.com (1 Post)
- witali (1 Post)
- leila.carvalho (1 Post)
- jaune162 (1 Post)
- olecom (1 Post)
- archanalal.sencha (1 Post)
- ppnectar (1 Post)
- Sherell (1 Post)


text:
The Division of Multicultural Affairs, the School of Medicine Student Affairs Office, the School of Medicine Academic Affairs Office and the Center for Bioethics and Medical Humanities will sponsor a Diversity Dialogue Session, "UMMC Common Reading Project: The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down," at noon on Friday, Jan. 25, in room R153 (lower amphitheatre).
The format will include an interactive discussion with experts on pertinent topics in medical ethics. Participants should read the selected book by Anne Fadiman before the event.
Lunch will be available to the first 100 in attendance. For more information, call 4-5012 or 4-1339.


text:
This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.
You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails
have been added to it since July of 2016.
Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.
Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Move of ompi_bitmap_t
From: Broto, Laurent G. (broto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-01 11:40:36
Hi folks,
I am Laurent Broto, a Rich Graham postdoc. I'm currently working on the BTL extraction with Greg Koenig and Rainer Keller.
At this time, I want to group all the *_bitmap function in only one layer.
Now, you know who I am :)
So, just one question. I had in my mind:
- adding a max_size in the opal_bitmap_t structure,
- at the init time, set this field with INT_MAX or whatever the type is _MAX,
- add a set_max_size functions to change the max_size,
- for each function needs this test, just do if( new_size < param->max_size) ...
I guess it is more efficient than the Jeff approach who is supposed to
- first test if the max size has been set,
- then ensure that the bitmap never grows beyond that size.
In the first approach we only do one test, in the second one, always one and sometimes two.
But may I miss something...
What do you think about this ?
-----Original Message-----
From: devel-bounces_at_[hidden] on behalf of Jeff Squyres
Sent: Sun 2/1/2009 7:37 AM
To: Open MPI Developers
Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Move of ompi_bitmap_t
I just looked through both opal_bitmap_t and ompi_bitmap_t and I think
that the only real difference is that in the ompi version, we check
(in various places) that the size of the bitmap never grows beyond
OMPI_FORTRAN_HANDLE_MAX; the opal version doesn't do these kind of
size checks.
I think it would be fairly straightforward to:
- add generic checks into the opal version, perhaps by adding a new
API call (opal_bitmap_set_max_size())
- if the max size has been set, then ensure that the bitmap never
grows beyond that size, otherwise let it have the same behavior as
today (grow without bound -- assumedly until malloc() fails)
It'll take a little care to ensure to merge the functionality
correctly, but it is possible. Once that is done, you can:
- remove the ompi_bitmap_t class
- s/ompi_bitmap/opal_bitmap/g in the OMPI layer
- add new calls to opal_bitmap_set_max_size(&bitmap,
OMPI_FORTRAN_HANDLE_MAX) in the OMPI layer (should only be in a few
places -- probably one for each MPI handle type...? It's been so long
since I've looked at that code that I don't remember offhand)
I'd generally be in favor of this because, although this is not a lot
of repeated code, it *is* repeated code -- so cleaning it up and
consolidating the non-Fortran stuff down in opal is not a Bad Thing.
On Jan 30, 2009, at 4:59 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> The history is simple. Originally, there was one bitmap_t in orte
> that was also used in ompi. Then the folks working on Fortran found
> that they had to put a limit in the bitmap code to avoid getting
> values outside of Fortran's range. However, this introduced a
> problem - if we had the limit in the orte version, then we limited
> ourselves unnecessarily, and introduced some abstraction questions
> since orte knows nothing about Fortran.
> So two were created. Then the orte_bitmap_t was blown away at a
> later time when we removed the GPR as George felt it wasn't
> necessary (which was true). It was later reborn when we needed it in
> the routed system, but this time it was done in opal as others
> indicated a potential more general use for that capability.
> The problem with uniting the two is that you either have to
> introduce Fortran-based limits into opal (which messes up the non-
> ompi uses), or deal with the Fortran limits in some other fashion.
> Neither is particularly pleasant, though it could be done.
> I think it primarily is a question for the Fortran folks to address
> - can they deal with Fortran limits in some other manner without
> making the code unmanageable and/or taking a performance hit?
> Ralph
> On Jan 30, 2009, at 2:40 PM, Richard Graham wrote:
>> This should really be viewed as a code maintenance RFC. The reason
>> this
>> came up in the first place is because we are investigating the btl
>> move, but
>> these are really two very distinct issues. There are two bits of
>> code that
>> have virtually the same functionality - they do have the same
>> interface I am
>> told. The question is, is there a good reason to keep two different
>> versions in the repository ? Not knowing the history of why a second
>> version was created this is an inquiry. Is there some performance
>> advantage, or some other advantage to having these two versions ?
>> Rich
>> On 1/30/09 3:23 PM, "Terry D. Dontje" <Terry.Dontje_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> I second Brian's concern. So unless this is just an announcement
>>> that
>>> this is being done on a tmp branch only until everything is in
>>> order I
>>> think we need further discussions.
>>> --td
>>> Brian Barrett wrote:
>>>> So once again, I bring up my objection of this entire line of
>>>> moving
>>>> until such time as the entire process is properly mapped out. I
>>>> believe it's premature to being moving around code in preparation
>>>> for
>>>> a move that hasn't been proven viable yet. Until there is concrete
>>>> evidence that such a move is possible, won't degrade application
>>>> performance, and does not make the code totally unmaintainable, I
>>>> believe that any related code changes should not be brought into
>>>> the
>>>> trunk.
>>>> Brian
>>>> On Jan 30, 2009, at 12:30 PM, Rainer Keller wrote:
>>>>> On behalf of Laurent Broto
>>>>> RFC: Move of ompi_bitmap_t
>>>>> WHAT: Move ompi_bitmap_t into opal or onet-layer
>>>>> WHY: Remove dependency on ompi-layer.
>>>>> WHERE: ompi/class
>>>>> WHEN: Open MPI-1.4
>>>>> TIMEOUT: February 3, 2009.
>>>>> -------------------------------------
>>>>> Details:
>>>>> The ompi_bitmap_t is being used in various places within
>>>>> opal/orte/ompi. With
>>>>> the proposed splitting of BTLs into a separate library, we are
>>>>> currently
>>>>> investigating several of the differences between ompi/class/* and
>>>>> opal/class/*
>>>>> One of the items is the ompi_bitmap_t which is quite similar to
>>>>> the
>>>>> opal_bitmap_t.
>>>>> The question is, whether we can remove favoring a solution just
>>>>> in opal.
>>>>> The data structures in the opal-version are the same,
>>>>> so is the interface,
>>>>> the implementation is *almost* the same....
>>>>> The difference is the Fortran handles ;-]!
>>>>> Maybe we're missing something but could we have a discussion, on
>>>>> why
>>>>> Fortran
>>>>> sizes are playing a role here, and if this is a hard
>>>>> requirement, how
>>>>> we could
>>>>> settle that into that current interface (possibly without a
>>>>> notion of
>>>>> Fortran,
>>>>> but rather, set some upper limit that the bitmap may grow to?)
>>>>> With best regards,
>>>>> Laurent and Rainer
>>>>> --
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Rainer Keller, PhD Tel: (865) 241-6293
>>>>> Oak Ridge National Lab Fax: (865) 241-4811
>>>>> PO Box 2008 MS 6164 Email: keller_at_[hidden]
>>>>> Oak Ridge, TN 37831-2008 AIM/Skype: rusraink
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> devel mailing list
>>>>> devel_at_[hidden]
>>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel_at_[hidden]
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
devel mailing list