text:
Pope Francis apologizes for sexual-abuse scandal.
Today, in an address to members of the International Catholic Child Bureau (BICE)--an NGO that works to protect the rights and dignity of children--Pope Francis asked for forgiveness for the "damage [abusive] priests have done for sexually abusing children." Noting that the total number of abusive priests is high, "obviously not compared to the number of all the priests," Francis reassured the audience that "the church is aware of this damage; it is personal, moral damage carried out by men of the church." He promised that "we will not take one step backward with regards to how we will deal with this problem, and the sanctions that must be imposed--on the contrary, we have to be even stronger."
Is this earth-shaking? Not really. But given that the last time he spoke on the subject it didn't exactly go over too well, this is a marked improvement. And--significantly--these remarks were not part of the prepared text. Francis could have read through the speech as written and avoided the uncomfortable subject altogether, bringing headlines like, "Pope Speaks to Child-Protection Group, Ignores Sexual Abuse." But he didn't. And what he said carries some force.
Francis pledged not to "take one step backward." He referred to "sanctions that must be imposed." Of course, the question remains: sanctions for whom? For abusive priests? We're aware of those sanctions. What about the bishops who enabled abusers? Francis has made it clear that he's not afraid to investigate an accused cardinal. But is he willing to penalize bishops who have put kids at risk--even after the hard lessons of 2002? That's the great unfinished business of the sexual-abuse scandal.
About the Author
67 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
The excruciatingly slow process of accountability grinds on, drip by drip by drip. Or does it?
Yes, apologies are plentiful, words are more than plentiful, but when will they not put a burden on survivors to forgive --- one more thing they are supposed to do despite no actions beyond delaying justice for all involved.
Where is an apology that does not inject some minimizing proviso like comparisons to all priests?
Wake me when there is compelling evidence that "the actions of men are the best interpreters of their thoughts" and Francis' actions speak for themselves.
Does no one in charge in the church see the damage done by the dream delayed that dries up one's spirit like a raisin in the sun?
What is it about accountability for sexual abuse that must take forever, if ever, when money/bling and any micro-hint of liberal outlook (e.g., William Morris) is quickly dispatched.
Too little too late matters.
See "Past members of sex abuse commissions tell of struggles with bishops" by Jason Berry at
Talk is cheap. Until there is real action calling bishops to accountability and imposing sanctions for those who cover up abuse and protect perps, this is just one more string of words. I have been reading a lot about the Russian revolution this year and was surprised to find myself drawing parallels between the Romanov family and the Catholic bishops, but the parallels are there. The Romanovs were a divided family when it came to how to address the challenges in governing Russia and those at the top were so assured that their position was ordained from on high and finally they were so exploited and divided by the likes of Rasputin that they had no energy whatever to bring to the work of sorting out the situation of the Russian people and making a reality based plan to address that situation responsibly.
When does Bishop Finn go?
I think you have to give Francis credit for placing Marie Collins on the new commission. EVen Tom Doyle does. She is targeting bishops as they were/are the principles in the coverup.
Marie Collins, the Irish sex abuse survivor who is a member of Pope Francis' new commission, told The Associated Press that her top priority was for the Vatican to punish bishops who have covered up for priest abusers.
"There's no point in my mind of having gold-plated child-protection programs in place if there's no sanction for a bishop who decides to ignore them," Collins said. "The reason everyone is so angry is not because they have abusers in their ranks. Abusers are in every rank of society. It's because of the systemic cover-up."
"Putting Marie Collins on the commission was a brilliant decision," said Dominican Fr. Thomas Doyle,..."
Am I the only subscriber to Commonweal that is not a cynic on the subject of the Pope's response to child abuse? Does it make sense to harp on this over and over again supposing that the next time we harp something will change. Where I come from that practice is recognized as a form of insanity. This pope is on the way to instituting changes that a year ago were completely unforeseen. He is mightily trying to change the culture so that, in time, it will permit additional changes once thought of as impossible. That could include a process for removing bishops whose ministries have become ineffective for various reasons. The process that has been in place is that they just get moved around. I think Francis intends to change that, but it will take time. Is not patience still a virtue?
The "sanctions" that must be imposed against whom? And why should the pope be asking victims for forgiveness when he hasn't done anything to get this systemic abuse stopped?
Until the pope takes decisive actions and stops making vague promises, nothing changes. The church may not be going backwards, but it sure is standing still when it comes to the sex abuse crises.
Pope Francis must fire and punish the church hierarchy, the bishops who have covered up sex crimes against kids and those who are still covering up these crimes.
Tragically the sex abuse and cover up within the church hierarchy throughout the world is still going on to this day. Cardinals and bishops are still not removing accused predator clergy, and they are still not reporting to law enforcement. Their so called "zero tolerance" policy is not being followed by the bishops who created it. They don't have to, because there is no punishment to force the bishops to change their ways of protecting their power and the institution rather than protecting children.
Once again we need outside law enforcement to get involved to stop these crimes against humanity.
Judy Jones, SNAP, Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests
I understand your chagrin. I am pulling for Francis too. But it is not cynical to be skeptical. Right now the hierarchy has to show that it is serious about getting bishops to stop covering up. The bishops really ignored their mandates of 2002. Fighting those they appointed to the committes to stop the coverups.The burden proof is now on the church leadership to show that the coverup will not continue.
No, you are not the only one. I'm right there with you.
Some people will never, ever be satified, no matter what the Church or the pope does.
With that said, just how exactly is the pope to "penalize" those scandalous bishops who, apparently, have no problem remaining in their respective posts?
Let's compare this sad, pitiful situation with the German case of "Bling Bishop." How did he get removed? From what I gather, (a) people of his diocese spoke up, which must have gone beyond getting outraged and complaining on the Internet, after which (b) the German bishops' conference chimed in, backing those people up, and [yadi yadi yada] (c) the Bling Bishop himself tendered his resignation to the pope.
Has any of these things ever been done here? I don't recall.
Y'all are sad people are cynical about this situation? I'm amazed you have anyone left even to feel cynical.
I agree with Carolyn and Molly. It's become almost impossible to imagine what it would be like if the church *did* actually act on this issue, as a secular insttution would which discovered high ranking officers covering up sex abuse. It was asked above ... "how exactly is the pope to "penalize" those scandalous bishops who, apparently, have no problem remaining in their respective posts?" .... fire them or defrock them or excommunicate them ... he has options, options he hasn't hesitated to use on others like Cardinal O'Brien, Fr. Greg Reynolds, Fr. John Dear, etc.
@Crystal Watson
"he has options, options he hasn't hesitated to use on others like Cardinal O'Brien, Fr. Greg Reynolds, Fr. John Dear, etc"'
Cardinal O'Brien resigned himself.
Former priest Greg Reyolds was excommunicated because, according to the reports I've read, he continued to publicly reject Church teaching and disobey rules, despite numerous prior notices and warnings.
Fr. John Dear is still a priest, just not a Jesuit anymore, and his and the Jesuits' decision to part ways has nothing to do with Pope Francis.
So, apples and oranges.
Gene - there is already precedents in where folks such as Finn can go. He can be moved to Conception Abbey near his current diocese for a life of prayer.
Or, give them options - abbey for prayer or mission lands to serve as a missionary (not a bishop).
O'Brien did not step down voluntarily and it certainly was not his choice to leave the UK ... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100266512/the-vatican-k...
Reynolds was excommunicated because he spoke up for women's ordination, but many others (for instance Robert Egan SJ has written a couple of articles at Commonweal on that subject) have done the same and have not been excommunicated. And he has spoken up for civil gay marriage, but so have others, (like Frank Brennan SJ at Eureka Street) but they haven't been excommunicated. I'm not sure why Reynolds was excommunicated.
Pope Francis apparently confirmed the dismissal of John Dear from the Jesuits ... http://m.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/jesuits-dismiss-peace-act...
I have to wonder if the reason the pope has punished the people mentioned above but not the bishops who have been shown to have covered up sex abuse is because he thinks O'Brien and Reynols and Dear have done something wrong but that those covering up sex abuse have not.
You guys talk as if it's still 2002. John Paul II, thought seriously ill, summoned all the US cardinals to Rome after which he addressed these revelations with clear condemnation. That was the same time when Bernard Law was sacked (oh, sure, he resigned). By the way he didn't get his sinecure in Rome until after he had spent the better part of a year as a chaplain for some nuns but in disgrace. So JPII gets some credit to offset his being taken in by Maciel. Let's remember that Maciel was a monster who managed to charm his Roman patrons with generous donations for their private charities. Then came Benedict who finally sent Maciel away. He made sincere efforts to turn the corner on this. Doesn't everyone remember his personal meetings with victims in Baltimore. I remember reading that some of those victims were moved by the pope's gesture. Popes do not make good prosecutors. He's a shepherd to his flock and a brother to the bishops. Let's concede that he might have done more while remembering that he couldn't have done more than by resigning and opening the way to Francis. While Bergoglio is not the Second Coming, he is saying and doing things that have the potential of turning the entire church around. Those of you who want him to jump all over the bishops you despise be reminded that he has no reason to despise them. He hardly knows them. But the commission, answerable only to him, may well come up with recommendations to how the worst offenders can be sent on their way. I am hopeful. Part of the reason for my hopefulness is that I continue to believe that Jesus Christ is present in the church. I continue to believe that the Mass provides faithful people with an opportunity to encounter him in his word and in his sacrament. In short, I can walk (decry the scandal and coverup) and chew gum (remain faithful) at the same time.
Many people have walked away from organized religion. Unfortunately, many who have "walked away" have lost their faith in the Lord and I believe the bishops are responsible for the loss of faith for those tens of thousands of people. Along with that responsibility goes the responsibility of individual bishops for the abuse of those children after the fact, that is, when a particular bishop really knew that an individual abused a child but instead of immediately removing him from ministry and reporting him to civil authorities asap, he transferred him to the other end of the diocese where that priest continued to abuse children.
Thank God there is still a lot of outrage out there. The bishops can and are still throwing around excommunications and trying to exercise their power but their moral power is pretty much gone. Ordinary people just aren't listening to the bishops anymore and those who do participate in the Church, do so on the local parish level. Ordinary people I talk to tell me that everything, everything they hear from the pulpit is filtered through the lens of the hierarchy's mishandling of the clergy sexual abuse scandal.
Remember too, that the bishops of the USCCB only did what they did do when things imploded in the Archdiocese of Boston, Massachusetts was because they got CAUGHT, like deer in headlights. They didn't want to act but they had to because of society's outrage via The Boston Globe and one very brave Catholic judge in Boston. We, the people, have to keep the pressure on and not be distracted by all their diversionary tactics including the attacks on American Sisters, which I personally view as such a tactic, and individual excommunications here and there.
On another level, though, we as citizens in a democracy must realize that it is society's responsibility to protect it most vulnerable members, especially its children. No religious denomination, not synagogue, mosque or cult can or should be depended upon to protect the children. If we didn't know that before we certainly know it now.
The PR spin, however, continues.
Just today Channel 10, the local Philadelphia NBC affiliate, had a reporter and cameraman outside the Cathedral Basilica of Saints Peter and Paul on the Parkway in center city to ask people what they thought of comments on forgiveness made by Pope Francis. I was there in Philly with supporters of legislative reform and one parent whose son, having been sexually abused and introduced to drugs by a trusted priest, committed suicide. That father was interviewed on NBC. Later on our local news just a few minutes after 6 p.m. it was reported that the Archdiocese of Philadelphia released a statement that the diocese goes "above and beyond (Pennsylvania) state law" regarding the sexual abuse of children.
Not true!
What is true is that Archbishop Charles Chaput along with the bishops of Pennsylvania and through the lobbying expertise of the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference vigorously, aggressively and viciously oppose the removal of statutes of limitation in regard to the sexual abuse of minor children and they continue to oppose a two year window for bringing forward previously time barred cases of childhood sexual abuse, by anyone, in PA as has been the diocese's pattern of behavior for the past few years. Such behavior is not out of character for Chaput because he has done the same thing in Colorado. He misrepresented proposed bills there and was successful in defeating that bill. Because of that success he is now in Philadelphia doing the same thing.
What the bishops, and now Pope Francis, seem to forget is that JUSTICE comes before FORGIVNESS. Moreover, really only two can forgive one who does such a despicable and egregious act; God and the individual violated. And that necessitates taking responsibility for one's crimes and mortal sins (for those errant individuals who still believe in mortal sins) which isn't easy for a narcissistic sociopath.
Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Advocate for Survivors & Legislative Reform
New Castle, DE
[email protected]
"I have to wonder if the reason the pope has punished the people mentioned above but not the bishops who have been shown to have covered up sex abuse is because he thinks O'Brien and Reynols and Dear have done something wrong but that those covering up sex abuse have not."
Oh wow, seriously?
Weren't those nuns lucky.
I agree with Molly.
Yes, seriously ... he's mentioned pedphiles but has he ever said a single wotd about the cover-ups or those who covered-up?
when will they not put a burden on survivors to forgive
Carolyn - if the requirement to forgive is a burden, then it is one that all of us bear. I agree it can't be easy for someone who has been the victim of something horrible to forgive her wrongdoer, whether the wrong is sexual abuse a minor, or physical abuse by a spouse, or losing a loved one to a drunk driver, or losing family members to war crimes, or losing a parent on 9/11, or any of the million other ways that people can be grievously wronged. Over time, it may be possible for at least some victims to forgive. I'd think we'd want to hold out hope for that possibility, and be willing to work with any victims that are willing to walk the path of forgiveness.
O'Brien did not step down voluntarily
Crystal - the article to which you link states a number of times that he resigned. But whether he jumped or was pushed, surely it's a good thing that he has been punished. The article suggests that he made sexual advances to young seminarians. Presumably they were not minors, yet it is still a gross misuse of power (and so is a form of abuse), not to mention a violation of his sacred vows. Let's support the church when it gets justice right, and urge the church to get it right in other cases.
What the bishops, and now Pope Francis, seem to forget is that JUSTICE comes before FORGIVNESS. Moreover, really only two can forgive one who does such a despicable and egregious act; God and the individual violated. And that necessitates taking responsibility for one's crimes and mortal sins (for those errant individuals who still believe in mortal sins) which isn't easy for a narcissistic sociopath.
Sister Maureen Paul - I don't fully agree with you. The requirement to be willing to forgive belongs to each of us who has been wronged. That willingness is not contingent on justice nor on the wrongdoer taking responsibility, although surely the ideal is that the wrongdoer ask his victim for forgiveness and that justice be done to the abuser. And I don't know why you think that it is errant to believe in mortal sins. All of us can choose to separate ourselves from God. If a priest sexually abusing a minor doesn't accomplish that, I don't know what would.
Of course O'Brien should have been punished - I'm not disputing that, I'm saying that if the Pope can fire him, why not the bishops/cardinals who covered up abuse?
The paramount issue at this point, as before, is not justice or repentence or mercy for the perps or their bishops. The paramount immediate need i to remove from office those bishops who still provide cover for priests who damage children. Forgiveness can come later.
Pope Francis has so far removed one accused (South American?) bishop and detains him in the Vatican. Even after a whole year, Francis is retaining such offenders as Cardinal Law in high positions. Bishop Finn is still in office. No, Francis' record on the sexual abuse of children leaves a great deal undone that could easily be done. Sadly, I have come to the conclusion that he *still* doesn't get it. Maybe Mary Collins can disabuse him of his ignorance. She was a good move, but at this point I'm not very optimistic, in spite of Francis' obvious kindnes. He just doesn't see the problem :-(
So Jim are you suggesting that we limit ourselves to working with the victims who forgive? I think there is so little understanding of the harm done to those who were sexually assaulted as children that it permits people to speak speciously of forgiveness. We're not talking about hurt feelings and some unhappy memories here. For some, deep in the throes of profound PTSD, we're talking about a brain injury in which confusing and horrifying memories can be triggered and act more like a seizure than "remembering" anything.
For others, maybe on the other side of the worst of that kind of "remembering" there is the bitterness of losing so many opportunities for joy and growth due to the harm done. For those close to people suffering the aftermath, there is absolute disbelief that apologies and calls for forgiveness are ever in the mouth of our leaders but no one has been held truly accountable. Forgiveness is a process rather than a moment in situations like this, something that folks need accompaniment in rather than exhortations to practice.
Jim, I think you misunderstood the sister's last statement. She was being sarcastic when she used the word "errant". She believes in mortal sin. She just doesn't think the abusers and cover-uppers do.
I am giving the pope a chance. I regret that some almost appear to resent that he removed the "bling" bishop before making further headway on some of the bishops implicated in the abuse scandals. It's all b
It's all bad. It's all linked to power and entitlement. It all hurts the Church and hurts our ability to ring out the gospel message.
Just the other day there was a conversation that turned to religion, and I was the only person present who was practicing a religion. I was happily taking jabs about truth, salvation, obedience, and other topics, until the conversation turned to sex abuse and cover-ups by clergy, and then each in turn had his accusation to make, each one worse than the previous one, and all I could say was: "I agree" "I agree" "I agree," sinking lower and lower in my seat. Then all fell silent.
I cannot defend the church's record on sex abuse.
When pope Francis says that the number of abusive priests is small compared to the total number of priests, it is true, of course, but he is missing the point. "Yes, but..." is not the right answer.
Not to mention hurting individual people.
Lee Podles says that Pope Francis is a fixer, not a reformer. I'm afraid it's starting to look like Podles is right.
H/T Rod Dreher
To those of you who think Pope Francis isn't doing anything, what have YOU done yourselves to bring about the changes you so desire, besides posting on the Internet?
@Maria: I am a DRE, I do the safe touch training for children from K to 10 with parents present; I have done the safe environment training for volunteers and I basically take the flak for this at the level of parish since all can see that while we screen and train volunteers, there are bishops getting arrested, in some cases even convicted, but no consequences to them from above in the Church unless they advocate women's ordination or mess with the money.
Maria, I have stopped donating money to the Catholic church and make donations to other institutions instead, until there is some accountability. I always watch over kids with a keen awareness of the possibility of sex abuse. When I see a situation I don't like, I try to create moments where kids might be able to confide in me, should there be anything to confide. I have indirectly let it be known that I would be ready to report to the police if I saw something. Given the lack of institutional guarantees, I have decided to take matters into my own hands, as far as I can: I do not trust anyone to not abuse kids under my care, and am correspondingly watchful. I do not rely on my own judgment of people: even the people whom I personally trust, I still keep track of their interactions with kids and make a mental note of any situation that, if it were a pattern, might be a sign that something is going on. It's not so much what I do, but a general attitude of paying attention. It's the opposite of blind trust. I believe that a contributing factor to the sex abuse crisis was that people used to trust priests blindly. Where children are concerned, we must resist that desire to trust.
It's a little like when you are walking in town and see little children on the sidewalk: you almost instinctively keep track of where they are with respect to traffic, whether there might be any risk of accident, and are ready to intervene quickly if needed.
I wish you were not so defensive. We are trying to help the church.
I have talked to many older people who have told me, one after the other: "The sex abuse scandal - that came as a complete surprise. I have been critical of many things among the clergy, but that possibility never even crossed my mind. It was unimaginable." With that mindset, they could well have worked with an abusive priest and not understood what they were seeing. In that way they were part of the problem.
As to pope Francis, his earlier remarks proved that he does not "get it". A few well-meaning sentences cannot undo that. He needs to meet with sex abuse survivors, with pope Benedict, with his committee, and to change his outlook. I believe he can. We will know he has when we see some actions, such as, for example, moving Bp Finn to a titular See.
"I wish you were not so defensive. We are trying to help the church."
I am not being defensive. Just incredibly sad and frustrated, as I'm sure you are.
But, I just don't see how harping on the same complaints and critiques -- some of which are not even warranted -- over and over and over again as if it were Groundhog day is helping the church.
Clearly, you and others don't believe the church is doing anything different; I disagree and have (almost) absolute faith that she is finally moving along the righ path toward healing and justice, albiet at a much slower pace than one would want, and not exactly the same way one would want.
Most importantly though, as John Feehily so powerfully said earlier, I believe God is with us, with the church, and this gives me hope, despite it all -- hope I never dared to have under previous pontificates.
And that's all I have to say about that. Peace.
I am under the impression that pope Benedict emeritus understood the evil of sex abuse, but had his hands tied by his immense respect of tradition. Pope Francis, in contrast, certainly seems to feel free to take on new initiatives whenever they seem fit to him. If only he could understand that the gravity of this scandal puts in question the way the church is governed, he might be willing to start a reform. I think that he is a good listener: let him listen and take it in.
The way I see it, this issue is tied in to larger issues in the Church. I too want to applaud the good that Pope Francis does to change the overall context in which we continue to wrestle with these questions. If it is true, as Claire suggests, that Pope Benedict "understood the evil" but "had his hands tied" we begin to see that the arrival at good outcomes does not simply or automatically follow from apprehending the evil that needs to be addressed. Perhaps by approaching the issues step by step, Pope Francis will bring more people along who also need to contribute to the good of responsible policies and decisions, and the ultimate outcome will be greater than anything he can do alone.
John Wilkins described the personality of John Paul II as a "colossus" striding across the world and credits him with catalyzing the fall of communism in Poland. But then he also describes his impotent rage at the freedoms of the West, and of course at the way Poland didn't turn out to be the ideal Catholic country he thought it would become once freed of the yoke of communism. JPII was the pope for so many years, I suspect we still carry this image and try, unconsciously, to apply it to Pope Francis. The hero striding across the world, the one who will overturn evil and finally free us from the yoke of slavery.
I read the situation the same way Claire and others do - Francis still doesn't "get it". He doesn't get that the issue is not the tragedy of the existence of priests who molested kids, and those who give a knee-jerk defense based on "everyone else" does it too also seem to miss the point. The point is that clericalism is THE huge obstacle in this, causing the wounds to go deeper instead of healing. Just imagine how the last decade might have unfolded in the church if Benedict had ordered Cardinal Law to a life of penance in a monastary instead of installing him with a presigious cathedral and committee assignments, including being a member of the group that vets bishops. The fox guarding the henhouse it seemed. He was rewarded for his "loyalty" to the institution, which was his disloyalty to the victims and to God.
But the protection of the hierarchy has trumped everything else, so the wounds fester and fester.
Rita is right that this issue is tied to larger issues - and these include clericalism first and foremost. I think that IF Francis at some point can stop being so defensive himself (a bishop who also did not exhibit compassion for victims at one time in his earlier life), he would act very quickly and decisively. He doesn't see it - yet. One hopes and prays that he will. He gives hope because he has shown that he can open his mind when he wants to, open it to consider possibilities that he once would not have been open to considering. He admits to having changed his mind, and to having "grown". So, if he is not frozen into the idolatry of clericalism that plagues the church, maybe he will someday see the light and DO something. The church has had enough of empty words.
From a wire story in the Washington Post this morning:
"This may be the first time a pope has talked of sanctions against complicit bishops. But that is all it is: talk," said Barbara Dorris of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, a leading victims advocacy group.
"On church governance, church finances, and simple living, he acts," Dorris said Friday. "On the rape of children, he talks."
"I still keep track of their interactions with kids and make a mental note of any situation that, if it were a pattern, might be a sign that something is going on."
Claire --
I think this brings up the problem of body language. Body language can say a great deal, but a great deal of it is ambiguous, e.g., a hug could be simple affection, it could be an expressiion of lust. We are rightly loathe, I think,to make accustions on the basis only of one ambiguous bit of body language. But if such ambiguous behavior persists, then what do you do? What are the teachers taught to do by those who train them?
Anne C. --
You seem to be saying that, while it may be true that Francis doesn't get how deeply the children have suffere, his defensiveness about his priests is the greater problem, i agree that he doesn't seem to have the foggiest notion that his own view of his priests and bishops is flawed. The biggest probem isn't that he hasn't removed the likes of Bishop Finn -- the biggest problem is that he doesn't see *the necessity to do so*.
I can understand his regularly defending the many, many good priests, but so far he seems untterly incapable emotionally of admitting that "many, many" of his "sons" are rotters, and some of them are bishops. His admirable loyalty is geting in the way of his seeing some of his sons as they really are.
I think that eventually Pope Benedict did see the perverts for what they are, and he did have great empathy with the victims. He just didn't have the physical strength to persist in reforming the hierarchy, so mercifully he resigned. Let's pray that Francis learns from his behavior
This seems to be back to the idea that the Church, rather than the police, decides if a complaint of child abuse is credible. It would be much more convincing if it said that the police had investigated and that prosecutors had decided the charges were unfounded - rather than that the CDF had.
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — The Apostolic Delegation of Puerto Rico announced Friday that the Vatican found no basis for sexual abuse accusations made against a well-known bishop in the U.S. territory.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which takes on such accusations, closed the case against Arecibo Bishop Daniel Fernandez, according to the delegation.
Fernandez said in a statement that he was satisfied with the decision. He recently announced that he had defrocked six priests accused of sex abuse from his diocese and that the accusations against him were made in revenge.
''I have always maintained that the allegations were false, and I trusted that the truth would prevail,'' he said.
Agnes Poventud, attorney for the man who had accused Fernandez of molesting him when he was a child, rejected the decision. She was quoted by El Nuevo Dia newspaper as saying that Vatican officials never interviewed her client.
Poventud did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
The decision comes as Fernandez fights a request from Puerto Rico's justice department to obtain confidential documents related to an ongoing sex abuse probe at his diocese in the north coastal town of Arecibo. The diocese had filed a lawsuit arguing that it should not have to turn over the information because it had already provided sufficient details and wanted to protect the identity of those who made the allegations.
A judge last week struck down the lawsuit and gave the diocese two weeks to hand over the information. In addition, authorities in early March charged one of Arecibo's defrocked priests, Edwin Antonio Mercado Viera, with committing lewd acts.
Puerto Rico's justice department also is investigating three other dioceses facing similar accusations.
I saw this today in response to what Francis said ... three actions that need to be taken: http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/pope-asks-forgiveness-%E2%... ...
- Remove all priests known to have raped children or others, and require reporting to secular authorities. Today, throughout the world, priests who are known to church officials continue to hold posts in congregations, schools, orphanages, and elsewhere, unbeknownst to local communities. The church has shown over and over that it cannot police itself. These matters must be turned over to the proper authorities, and it is well within the scope of Pope Francis's power to make sure this happens.
- Punish church officials who have covered up cases of rape and sexual violence by clergy, failed to report them, and obstructed investigations by law enforcement. Pope Francis's promised "sanctions" must address the systemic impunity that helped to create the culture of rape and sexual violence that exists today within the church.
- Encourage and protect church whistleblowers who have come forward with information about the crisis of sexual violence. So far church officials have intimidated and retaliated against whistleblowers. Pope Francis can and must work with whistleblowers to get to the root of the problem.
The article says that the man accused the bishop of molesting him "when he was a child."
That raises the question of what to do when the police will not investigate because the statute of limitations has expired
How can the Church regain its credibility in that situation?
One possibility is to strengthen the role of lay diocesan review boards by allowing them to receive complaints directly from the public, investigate them with their own staff or consultants and publish their findings publicly rather than simply acting as behind the scenes advisors to the bishop.
There's a similarity to recent discussions on whether military commanders should be able to decide which accusations of rape can be prosecuted and what penalties can be imposed.
Bishops and their lawyers are probably more comfortable with the present situation. The question is whether the they will see the advantage of trading some control for greater credibility.
One of the things Pope Francis set out to do (and was voted for, by at least some of the cardinals, to do) is revive the "collegiality" debated at, and encouraged in the documents of, Vatican II. This would mean leaving more decisions to national bishops' conferences and individual bishops and carefully taking local views into account when making decisions at the center. Americans, wrestling with a translation of the Mass produced by Romans seriously deficient in English, could only applaud. BUT...
...But if that is how the Church should be run, and how Francis wants to run it, he can't put on his Superman cape, a la Blessed JPIII and swoop across continents, firing bishops here, sentencing them to three years hard reflection there, staging events for the edification of the most outraged in our midst.
Yes, his statements on the subject have been tinny, and yes, it is passing strange that Bishop Finn still is allowed to play dress up on Sundays. But the advisory commission is meeting, the process of collegiality is under way and maybe, in the end, the Church will steady itself the way the bishops of Vatican II thought it should, even if it is slower and less showy than shaking a finger at a Sadinista or calling down the Holy Spirit on the communist government of Poland. Or so I pray.
"how exactly is the pope to "penalize" those scandalous bishops who, apparently, have no problem remaining in their respective posts"
Read my lips:
He ordains them bishops. He approves their assignments. He can fire their butts. Now.
There is always need for missionaries to the remotest parts of the world.
Correction: he APPROVES their being ordained bishops.
"he can't put on his Superman cape, a la Blessed JPIII and swoop across continents, firing bishops here, sentencing them to three years hard reflection there, staging events for the edification of the most outraged in our midst."
Actually, I think he can and has (Cardinal O'Brien a case in point). You think the bishops can be trusted to police other bishops? And who will go after the cardinals, like Law, Mahony, Brady, O'Brien? The most outraged in our communit = a majority of Catholics ... according to a Pew Forum survey, most Catholics listed the sex abuse problem as the biggest problem facing the church.
A CEO runs a corporation through a group of direct reports who have to be trusted to do what the management and board of directors have agreed is necessary to accomplish the organization's mission.
Normally a good CEO allows that to happen by giving individual and collective continuous guidance to the DRs as to whether they are on track or not.
However, if a situation arises that threatens to destroy the credibility of the organization a good CEO sometimes has to take unilateral action to prevent or stop the situation before it gets worse in the eyes of the public and customers.
It's best to let the DRs handle matters but not if their foot-dragging causes undue or even irreparable harm to the overall goal.
Francis IS the CEO of Roman Catholicism, Inc.
A CEO runs a corporation through a group of direct reports who have to be trusted to do what the management and board of directors have agreed is necessary to accomplish the organization's mission.
Normally a good CEO allows that to happen by giving individual and collective continuous guidance to the DRs as to whether they are on track or not.
However, if a situation arises that threatens to destroy the credibility of the organization a good CEO sometimes has to take unilateral action to prevent or stop the situation before it gets worse in the eyes of the public and customers.
It's best to let the DRs handle matters but not if their foot-dragging causes undue or even irreparable harm to the overall goal.
Francis IS the CEO of Roman Catholicism, Inc.
if [collegiality] is how the Church should be run, and how Francis wants to run it, he can't put on his Superman cape,
I think we have discussed this a few years ago. The idea is that in the normal course of events, bishops run their dioceses and decisions (including local nominations?) are taken collegially by the national assembly of bishops. In the normal course of events, when things go relatively smoothly, the Vatican would take no part in the decisions (about the missal, for example, and many other questions of the daily life of the church.) Rome intervenes only in the extraordinary case when there is a grave problem that the local church is unable to deal with: episcopal cover-up would be a good example of such a problem.
So, collegiality is compatible with effective leadership and occasional, rare, well-targeted interventions.
Claire, I agree -- to a point. The extraordinary case was about 10 years ago while Blessed JPII was sanctioning Sandinistas and encouraging youth to cheer for whatever. The problem is no longer extraordinary. It is now normal. And the normal is, looking at it broadly, a mess. If you are just talking about the US of A, where there is a good written policy and the Bishop of Lincoln and the ward of the D.A. in Kansas City, yeah, that mess could still be cleared up fairly quickly. But simultaneously you have countries where nothing good at all has happened, countries where all the wrong things have happened, and so on. One size won't fit all.
So Jim are you suggesting that we limit ourselves to working with the victims who forgive?
No, not at all, Molly. Nor am I speaking speciously of forgiveness - I'm attempting to speak honestly of it. I don't think the church should write off the possibility of forgiveness and reconciliation.
Jim, I think you misunderstood the sister's last statement. She was being sarcastic when she used the word "errant".
Thanks, Suzanne, you're right - I didn't catch that she was being sarcastic. So sorry, Sister.
I love Francis. I would like to see him get this right. I would give him whatever positive encouragement I could to help him get this right.
I don't love Francis but I do like him. I hope the best for his papacy and I think he's an incredible improvement over past popes. Hmmm - I guess I feel about him the way I feel about Obama :)
"You think the bishops can be trusted to police other bishops?"
Crystal --
Once again, Plato's question: who shall guard the guardians? It seems to me that history has shown that there is never a lack within the RCC of priests of over-weening ambition who crave, and know how to get, spiritual power. And so we have been saddled with a Vatican with an absolute monarch on the top with a "college" of cardinals that historically has not been very collegial at all.
So what sort of structure at the top of the Church would work against the sort of concentration of power in the hands of a few which seems implicit in the pope/king, curia/oligarchy set up? Maybe Francis' reforms should somehow split the structure of the college of cardinals (or whomever is at the top besides the pope) into two groups -- sort of a bicameral government in the Vatican. But how might this work? A House of Representatives made up of mere bishops and a Senate made up of cardinals? It might work.
How about a system kind of like the Episcopal Church's? A leader with term limits (9 years) who is voted in by a meeting of a house of bishops and a house of deputies (priests and lay people). I believe that a voted-for disciplinary board made up of bishops, priests, and lay people handles charges against bishops ... http://www.episcopalchurch.org/fr/notice/disciplinary-board-bishops-form...
Crystal --
On a more local level, yes, something like that would make sense. The two chambers in either case would be representative of those who are aquained best with the probems (the House) and, theoretically, those who are more likely to propose workable solutions (the Senate). Or something like that. What we have now is one chamber in the Vatican (the cardinals) which is not required to consider the problems as they are experienced by the wider Church, so the teachings and policies become at best irrelevant.
Crystal, thank you for the Episcopal link. I was going to suggest the same thing. The beauty of the system of governance in the Episcopal church is that it also provides for participation in the laity in the selection of their own bishops, and in the whole governance of the church.
Ann's observation is on point also. So it might be a good idea if the Catholic church could also find a way to adapt the model of the Anglican Communion and essentially have national, or at least regional, churches that understand what is going on and what is needed in their own jurisdiction. Does this always work? Can it lead to break-ups? Perhaps. Certainly the Anglican Communion has been struggling in recent years. Bishops in Africa are backing government sanctions against gays, which can include imprisonment or even execution. Not only the Anglican bishops, but the Roman Catholic bishops have also so far not protested these laws. So far as we know, Rome has yet to address this issue . The African bishops came close to full schism from the Anglican Communion over the issue of gay priests and gay bishops. It may still happen, and one could imagine something similar happening in a Roman Catholic church that permitted a degree of regional/national autonomy. Yet that would perhaps be preferable to the situation now, in an unwieldy church of more than 1 billion. What is the standard question - unity or uniformity?
Hi Anne,
Yes, interesting the latest wrinkle with the Anglican Communion ... Justin Welby making the argument that the Church of England shouldn't do same sex marriages because it will lead to deaths in African countries - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2014/apr/05/archbishop-w...
I don't know the answer, but I don't think 'staying together' can be the highest priority of all.
The Anglicans in England are, in effect, having to make life-and-death decisions for Anglicans in Africa: Africans Christians will die if Apb. Welby says "Gay marriages are permissible", but nothing will happen to the Archbishop. What a hellish set of circumstances for all of them. For Apb. Welby it's like having to send other people and their children off to war but staying home himself. So how does he make a prudent decision? Again, prudence makes demands but doesn't say how ot meet the demands fairly. It doesn't even say what "fair" is.
I don't see why African Anglicans will die if the English church blesses gay marriage. It seems far more likely that the formal schism that was narrowly avoided a few years ago will finally take place and the African church will go its own way. The Anglican bishop have supported this horrendous legislation, and the RC bishops have not opposed it.
Several conservative Episcopal churches in the US broke away a few years ago when Bishop Robinson was confirmed as bishop in New Hampshire. They are now loosely affiliated with one another instead of the Episcopal church. They are few in number, and the main fall-out was the litigation over property - who owned the buildings and land. The courts so far have ruled in favor o the Episcopal church instead of the congregations that broke away from ECUSA. But, that's a different issue.
I'm with Crystal though - I don't know the answer, but I don't think 'staying together' can be the highest priority of all.
Yeah, there's a lot of skepticism about what Welby said - Episcopal priest Susan Russell wrote about it here .... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-susan-russell/archbishop-of-canterbury...
Don't minimize the importance of staying together. The breakdown of family and community has been a regrettable connsequence of the kind of individualism that capitalism seems to bring in its wake. I am not at all opposed to individualism but not at the expense of harmony and community.
It takes time for a consensus to emerge and somtimes we just need to be patient. Dialgoue, conversation, no sudden moves to break things apart abruptly.
I have a Chinese friend who told me that in his view the Chinese government knows full well that Communism is dead but is just letting it slowly die. They don't want any sudden revolutionary lurches so are managing the transition slowly. Cohesion, saving face, all of these are highly valued. And we could learn a lot from that.
Further to what I said above: Francis is CEO of Roman Catholicism, Inc ..........NOT L.L.C!
The liability fully and always attaches to the organization.


text:
TOPEKA, Kan. (WIBW) -A new candidate has put his name in the hat for the seat in the state senate's 18th distrtict, and he's a well known name.
Retired Shawnee County Sheriff Dick Barta made his announcement official this afternoon.
Dick Barta will join two-term incumbent Democratic Senator Laura Kelly and GOP candidates Gary Parnell and Cristina Fischer in the race to serve northern Shawnee County and all of Wabunsee county.
With his background in law enforcement, he feels ready to tackle the issues within the senate.
"I always tried to treat citizens with respect and courtesy and uphold public trust in the community. I spent my life serving in law enforcement. Failure was never an option no matter how difficult the situation," said Barta.
He went on to say, "Those same things that worked as sheriff, being fiscally responsible, upholding values of our community and serving Shawnee County, those are needed i believe, in our state senate."
The former sheriff sees one problem in particular that most kansas would like to see put to an end. He says, "We've all seen the gridlock and bickering in our state senate and Kansans deserve better than that. It's time for a new approach, one that works to find solutions and solve problems.
The Republican Primary between Cristina Fischer, Gary Parnell and Dick Barta will take place August 7th.
There is currently no democrat running against incumbent Senator Kelly.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I've never really fully grasped the meaning of
[一]{いち}[応]{おう} since it seems to have no good English equivalent. What is the meaning, usage, and nuances of
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
A word that might help you to understand 一応 is tentative, in both senses:
I'll post the Japanese example sentences from ニューセンチュリー和英辞典 and relate them to that word.
I don't intend to suggest that "tentative" is a natural translation for all circumstances. This is just to help you get an idea. There are many ways of actually translating it -- for instance, in my second sentence, I used "just", and that word would probably have sufficed on its own.
Other possible translations depending on the context include "for the time being", "some kind of a", "seems to be", and other words that indicate uncertainty or temporariness.
I think sawa's answer is correct, but it might mean other things as well in different contexts. Looking at Space ALC it seems to also mean, especially at the start of a sentence:
I think "it [won't/doesn't] [fit/suit/work with] something but X will happen anyway" might also work in some contexts. For example, I think "It doesn't really suit him, but he's doing X anyway" might work.
Another way of translating this might be "I guess...", "kind of..." or "sort of..." e.g. "I kind of agree with him I guess", "there's a settlement of sorts", "I guess I'll go along with it.".


text:
1000 E. University Ave
Dept. 3302
Laramie, WY 82071
Phone: 307 766-4286
Fax: 307 766-2606
Skip to Main Navigation. Each navigation link will open a list of sub navigation links.
David Jones is the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
A graduate of Westminster College (New Wilmington, Pa., 1980) with a B.S. in biology and the University of Iowa with a M.A. (1983) and Ph.D. (1987) in speech pathology, David joined UW in 2001 as Associate Professor in the Division of Communication Disorders. He was promoted to Full Professor in 2005, and he has been Associate Dean for Academic Affairs in the College of Health Sciences since 2007. Previously, he was Clinical Associate Professor in the Department of Otolaryngology at Indiana University. He began his career as a research scientist in the Department of Otolaryngology at the University of Iowa.
David has published primarily in the area of assessment and treatment of speech disorders related to cleft palate and velopharyngeal dysfunction. He currently teaches an undergraduate course on the anatomy and physiology of speech and hearing, and a graduate course on voice disorders. He was awarded the John P. Ellbogen Meritorious Classroom Teaching Award in 2005, and he has been the recipient of numerous Mortar Board 'Top Prof' Awards. He is a member of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association. He has served as a section editor for the Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, a member of the board of directors for the Cleft Palate Foundation, and a member of executive council for the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.
In addition to his academic and scholarly work, David has devoted much of his career to clinical service to children and families affected by cleft lip and palate and craniofacial anomalies. He was an integral member of interdisciplinary cleft palate-craniofacial teams at the University of Iowa and Indiana University, and he currently serves on the Wyoming State Cleft Palate Team.
His interests include music and tennis, and he enjoys coaching youth basketball and tennis. He shares a home with his wife, Mary. They have one daughter.


text:
What does the drop in
一、 mean?
What does the drop in
It'a punctuation, which does not exist in English, and I don't know its English name.
In Chinese it's called
Usually in English, comma would be used.
In your example, it is just used a symbol separating the listing number and the title, which is not related to the use I mentioned above. This is common when Chinese numbers are used. The punctuation itself does not carry actual meaning.
While we're on this topic, you should also get used to:
《》 are equivalent title marks
那部电影的名字是《红高粱》: The title of that movie is Hong Gao Liang (Red Sorghum).
『...』 are quotation marks.
If you're reading verticle text, use this as quotation marks:
. . .
It's a comma, and it serves the same purpose as a colon in English. Somewhere further down in this lesson you'll see a 二 with a similar comma, followed by a heading, maybe 词汇.
It's a number with a Comma(顿号 in Chinese) and often appears in normal report or the text book for Chinese or something have relationship with social sciences.
I think "一.课文" is better. If you wirite it as "一 课文" is OK either.Maybe the editor stress the legitimacy of Chinese.
The comma dùn hào(顿号) is often used express pause between two word or among many word.The pause by comma is shorter than the comma dòu hào(逗号)
Like this 我喜欢足球、篮球、乒乓球、保龄球等。(I like playing football、basketball、pingpang、bowling and so on)
Here it's only a symbol to make the text look more normal. It appear sometimes in Chinese book.In other books like mathematic book or chemistry (science or engineering ) book we use 《.》 or not use a symbol more often.


text:
For a Markov process $X$ on the Polish space $\mathscr X$ its transition probability is given by $$ P(x,A) :=\mathsf P_x (X_1\in A) $$ and $X$ is time-reversible if there is a probability measure $\pi$ such that for any $A,B$ in a Borel $\sigma$-algebra of $\mathscr X$ denoted by $\mathscr B(\mathscr X)$ it holds that $$ \int\limits_A P(x,B)\pi(dx) = \int\limits_B P(x,A)\pi(dx). $$ The discrete-time Laplacian $\Delta$ and the gradient $\nabla_{xy}$ are defined as $$ \nabla_{xy}f = f(y)-f(x) $$ and $$ \Delta f(x) = \int\limits_\mathscr Xf(y)P(x,dy)-f(x) = \int\limits_\mathscr X(\nabla_{xy}f)P(x,dy). $$
In the case when $\mathscr X$ is countable, for any measurable $A$ the following Green's formula holds: $$ \int\limits_A\Delta f(x)g(x)\pi(dx) = -\frac12\int\limits_{A}\nabla_{xy}f\cdot\nabla_{xy}g\;\pi(dx)+\int\limits_{A}\int\limits_{A^c}(\nabla_{xy}f)g(x)P(x,dy)\pi(dx). $$ This formula can be generalized for an uncountable state space as well. I wonder though if there is an analogue for the case when $X$ is not time-reverisble.


text:
Connector: 3/4" Flange: 3-1/4" dia. Height: 5-7/8" Bolt Size: 5/16" Pipe Size: 3/4" Hose: 90 degrees
This product ships in 1 business day.
Add to Cart and enter your Postal Code to determine the shipping charges and estimated delivery date.
Most products and orders leave our warehouse in 1 business day. However, select items may take more processing time. Alaska and Hawaii orders please add 1 additional warehouse processing day.
Standard Shipping Policies


text:
RECOGNIZED: Nikolas A. Kamarados, a certified financial planner with Prudential, recently was named a member of the 2011-12 Prudential Annuities Masters Council, a program established in 2007 to recognize the exceptional achievement of top-performing financial professionals in annuity sales and service.
Kamarados has private offices located in Follansbee and East Liverpool. He can be reached at email@example.com or by calling (304) 748-3156 or (330) 386-9790.
MEALTIME: McDonald's is introducing a new Happy Meal campaign this week to help make good nutrition fun for kids.
The campaign includes TV advertisements featuring menu items from recommended food groups found in the new Happy Meal, now available nationwide, and are the first advertisements that support McDonald's commitment to promote nutrition and active lifestyle messages in advertisements targeting kids.
Every McDonald's Happy Meal now automatically includes apple slices and a kid-size fry.
As the company continues to develop and test new menu offerings, a Happy Meal Chef's contest gives two parent and child teams the opportunity to help in the creation and testing of new, nutrition-minded Happy Meal choices alongside McDonald's executive chef Dan Coudreaut.
Now through April 18, McDonald's is seeking inspiring stories from parent and child teams who enjoy cooking with wholesome ingredients at family mealtime. Kids must be between ages 8-11 to participate and will be required to answer a brief questionnaire and submit a short video online that creatively showcases their family mealtime.
Ten kids will win a trip to the London 2012 Olympic Games as part of McDonald's Global Champions of Play program where they will join kids from around the world to celebrate balanced eating and fun play, according to officials. Two grand prize winners will become honorary "Happy Meal Chefs." The winning young chefs will experience a one-of-a-kind apprenticeship with Coudreaut.
"For the first time, 100 percent of our national marketing efforts to kids will include nutrition or active lifestyle messages - a significant move in our ongoing commitment to children's wellbeing," said Neil Golden, McDonald's USA chief marketing officer.
"We are proud of this new approach and believe it will help make nutrition fun for kids while helping families feel even better about the food choices they make when visiting McDonald's."
CERTIFIED: Dr. Emil R. Nardone II, founder and CEO of the Original Nardone Chiropractic & Wx, has been certified by the Spine Research Institute of San Diego as a traumatologist, an expert in whiplash injury treatment.
The certification insight into the physics of the actual crash mechanics and the occupant kinematics, or motions, resulting from the crash as well as all of the latest diagnostic methods and treatments approaches.
For the past 15 years, the institute has limited the certification to only 100 physicians each year.
A graduate of John Marshall High School, Nardone received a bachelor of science degree in biology/chemistry from Fairmont State University and his doctorate from the Southern California University of Health Sciences while serving in the Army National Guard. Nardone is currently licensed in West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania, including board certifications in acupuncture and corrective exercises.
In 2000, Nardone began his associate training at Dexter Chiropractic in Marietta, where he gained knowledge in patient and practice management.


text:
5 Famous Scientists Dismissed as Morons in Their Time
Every nutjob in the world with some out-there theory thinks he's Galileo, rejected for daring to think different. Virtually all of them are, in fact, simply insane.
Yet, there have been brilliant rebels who put their own world-changing ideas on the line, only to end up like Doc Brown in his alternate timeline: humiliated, ridiculed, ignored and/or straight driven to insanity.
#5. Gregor Mendel
You probably know Mendel as the guy who pioneered the science of genetics, and for keeping eighth-graders busy while science teachers watch porn at their desks. Anybody with a high school diploma has filled out those dominant/recessive trait Punnett squares ...
Be honest. How many of you had this explained by a PE coach?
... though astute readers are probably wondering why that technique is called a Punnett square if it predicts patterns Mendel discovered.
What you probably didn't know was that before making his revolutionary discovery, Gregor Mendel flunked his ass out of school and resigned himself to a quiet life as the abbot of a monastery. It had an extensive experimental garden and there Mendel patiently spent the next seven years of his life breeding and cross-breeding peas.
He also hosted a ton of cocaine orgies, but who wants to hear about that?
He carefully documented his work and developed what would eventually be known as Mendel's Laws of Inheritance. Then he wrote it up and got it published in an lesser-known journal, the Journal of the Brno Natural History Society in 1866.
His Genius Was Rewarded By ...
A quiet life of complete anonymity. Mendel's work was read by about zero people, even after he took it upon himself to contact the highest minds of his time by personally sending them copies of his theory. It turns out he would have been better off writing it on a paper bag filled with dog shit and leaving the whole flaming mess on porches.
Why did they ignore him? Because the greatest minds of his time couldn't understand him. It wasn't until 16 years after his death that three independent botanists rediscover Mendel's work and started the genetics ball rolling.
#4. Ignaz Semmelweis
We've brought up poor old Semmelweis once before, but just in case you don't have a running loop of Cracked articles going through your head, here's the recap: Back in 1847, Semmelweis found himself in charge of two maternity clinics. The first clinic was a teaching school, with medical students learning birthing, autopsying and everything in between. The second clinic was intended for women who couldn't afford health care and was serviced by midwives, not actual doctors or students.
His ear-hair acted as attending physician.
Yet it was the second clinic that women of all social statuses begged to get into. Why? Because if they went to the first clinic they'd have a 10 percent chance of dying of puerperal fever, a six percent greater rate of death than in the midwife-run hospital. Women literally had a better chance of surviving a birth on the street than in the first clinic. After an exhaustive study, Semmelweis figured out that medical students were smothered in disease cooties from cadavers, and that maybe, just maybe, they should wash their hands in between the autopsy room and the birthing rooms.
Not pictured: Sterility.
He insisted students perform a simple chlorine wash after handling dead guys and immediately got the death rate down to one to two percent. With numbers like that, you'd think the whole continent of Europe, much less the medical community, would have crowned him "king of live babies" or something.
His Genius Was Rewarded By ...
First dementia, then a beatdown at an insane asylum, then death, by virtually the same disease he had eradicated in his own hospital.
Semmelweis didn't just have the disregard of his contemporaries, he had their flat-out scorn. Maybe it was because he didn't get around to explaining himself on paper right away, so no one understood what hand-washing had to do with keeping people alive. Some doctors were actually insulted that he was accusing Viennese medical students being dirty enough to kill people.
Within 14 years of his groundbreaking discovery, Semmelweis just stopped giving a fuck. He got drunk all the time and called all his detractors "ignoramuses" and "murderers." He started chilling with prostitutes and lashing out at family. That last part proved to be a bad move, because in 1865 they had him committed to an insane asylum, where he was promptly beat up and stuck in a dark cellar.
Pictured: Mental Health Care, 1865-style.
He died two weeks later. It took another 20 years and Louis Pasteur's germ theory for the rest of the world to come around to the concept of washing your hands to keep from getting sick.
#3. George Zweig
The year 1964 was a watershed year by any measure. The Beatles arrived, the Civil Rights Act was passed, Nicolas Cage was born and in two separate parts of the world, two separate scientists proposed the existence of quarks, the teeny-tiny subatomic particles that combine to form matter. If you've been paying attention, you know one of these guys is about to get screwed. (Hint: It's George Zweig.)
Zweig had three things going against him in 1964. One, he was a young graduate student, unpublished and unproven. Two, he was working at a particle research center in Geneva. You'd think that would be an advantage, but it turns out his institute had a stringent model for publication, and his paper on quarks, which he called "aces," didn't meet its standards (even though he had come up with a much cooler name for the particle). And three, an older scientist from his grad school proposed the exact same theory at the exact same time and because of his stature was able to publish that exact same theory with the exact same publication that rejected Zweig's.
Just seeing if you're paying attention.
At first, both men were called crazy for their insane notions of invisible particles. They had no model of behavior for the buggers and no methods of ever actually looking at them. But eventually the science world came around, and by 1969, Zweig's rival was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for his work. As for Zweig ...
His Genius Was Rewarded By ...
Being blackballed by a major university and accusations of being a "charlatan."
According to Wikipedia, that table-standing midget in blue is a charlatan.
It wasn't until the 1970s that anyone could actually prove the existence of quarks, and by that time, the Nobel Prize committee felt it had already given the little particles enough attention, so it was reluctant to revisit the subject. Nevertheless, in 1977, Zweig and his rival were both nominated, but neither won. Zweig ended up changing his field of study to neurobiology, presumably believing that if he made a seminal contribution to every area of science, he'd eventually get credit for something.
Sadly, they don't give a Nobel Prize for smoldering looks.


text:
Print this page
Artbeads Ratings and Reviews
See All Reviews
Shop Now At Artbeads
Choose a Category
Shop Alphabet Beads
Shop Artbeads.com Store
Shop Bags & Boxes
Shop Bali Beads
Shop Base Metal Components
Shop Beading Books
Shop Bracelets & Neckwear
Shop Charms
Shop Clearance Items
Shop Copper Clasps
Shop Copper Components
Shop Copper Pendants
Shop Crafts & Accessories
Shop Cubic Zirconia Beads
Shop Earrings
Shop Freshwater Pearls
Shop Gemstone Beads
Shop Gift Certificates/Cards
Shop Glass Beads
Shop Gold Beads
Shop Gold Components
Shop Hill Tribe Silver Beads
Shop Horn Beads
Shop Jewelry Kits
Shop Limited Edition
Shop Limited Edition Gemstones
Shop Limited Edition Glass Beads
Shop Natural Beads
Shop Natural Components
Shop Pendants
Shop Pewter Beads
Shop Pewter Components
Shop Porcelain Beads
Shop Resin Beads
Shop Seed Beads
Shop Shell Beads
Shop Shell Pendants
Shop Silk Beads
Shop Silver Components
Shop Sterling Silver Beads
Shop Stringing Materials
Shop Swarovski Components
Shop Swarovski Crystal Beads
Shop Swarovski Pendants
Shop Swarovski Rhinestones
Shop Tools & Supplies
Shop Vintage Beads
Shop Watch Faces
Shop Weekly Specials
Shop Wire & Chain
Shop Wood Beads
Shop Wooden Components
Reviews Home
(Unknown) Reviews
Product Reviews
Cande™ Pavé 8mm Sapphire Lightweight Epoxy Clay Round Bead
Give your designs majestic blue color with the Cande™ Pavé 8mm sapphire crystal lightweight clay round bead. The dazzling blue crystals are set closely together and are held in place by the dark blue epoxy clay, so this bead is covered in sparkle. These beads are ultra lightweight, so it's simple to incorporate them into bracelet designs, necklace designs and even earrings. Pair this bead with
silver beads
for sophisticated elegance in all of your upcoming designs.
Customer Reviews for
Cande™ Pavé 8mm Sapphire Lightweight Epoxy Clay Round Bead
This product has not yet been reviewed.
Click here
to continue to the product details page.


text:
There are no posts in this category yet. Please try another link.
Check Out the ACO Blog!
Get the latest news and updates from us on issues that matter to youClick Here
Latest ACO Tweets
10 June 2013
Tenn."Muslim Activists vow to keep talking" http://t.co/hKvgTFAN45
10 June 2013
Join us Sunday "Inside Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think" screening 3-6pm at Casa Azafran followed by Q&A https://t.co/H8QwiARHvB
4 June 2013
"Inside Islam:What a Billion Muslims Really Think" movie screening Sun. 16th 1-5pm at Casa Azafran followed by Q&A https://t.co/H8QwiARHvB
30 May 2013
RT @_MYNT: Join us, @ACOTN, & @tnimmigrant on 6/16 @CasaAzafranTN to see "What a Billion Muslims Really Think" w/ @DanielTutt! http://t.co/…
30 May 2013
RT @MoveInNashville: NashvilleScene: MT @ACOTN Tennessee Court of Appeal has ruled that Rutherford County provided the proper public... htt…
Events Calendar
- Events are coming soon, stay tuned!


text:
I would like to know how important the cosmic censorship conjecture is? Should a quantum theory of gravity must obey this? It was never rigorously proved in classical GR too. What would be the consequences if it turns out that CCC (weak) does not hold?
Lehner and Pretorius have recently given some persuasive numerical evidence that there are generic violations of cosmic censorship which arise in the time evolution of black strings in 5d gravity, aka the Gregory-LaFlamme instability http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.5960 . The failure of cosmic censorship certainly does not imply the downfall of causality. Classically it means we can see a singularity without it being hidden behind a horizon. This seems to me like a very good thing. We all believe that there is some UV completion of gravity, although different camps have different views on what this is. This theory will cut off the singularity through some combination of classical modifications to Einstein gravity and quantum effects. Being able to see such a direct effect of the UV completion would be a wonderful thing, so I think we should all hope that there are also generic violations of cosmic censorship in four dimensions, although as far as I know the jury is still out on this.
Cosmic censorship is very important, not because it is required for classical causality (we need quantum gravity anyway), but because it is a part of black hole thermodynamics. If you believe that singularities in GR only form during gravitational collapse, the horizon cannot go through a zero temperature point, and in all the exact solutions, the extremal cases are boundaries to the naked singular cases.
The issue is confused by certain claims. First, it is important to note that censorship can only hold with matter that doesn't form domain-wall singularities in flat space. If you make dust matter with velocity directed so that all the mass ends up on a plane at some time t, you will get a jump in the metric derivative on the wall, and this is a singularity technically speaking. So you need a generic situation.
The recent claimed violation of cosmic censorship in the Gregory-Laflamme model gives you an idea of what is required. Here is a long string black hole, breaking up into spheres. The spherical black holes form, with filaments that link them, and these filaments themselves break up.
The result is that the filaments shrink to zero size, and in this limit, they vanish entirely, it is as if they were never there. This is not a violation of cosmic censorship because the spacetime in the limit is entirely smooth, each place where the line horizon once was becomes perfectly regular in the limit, except at those places (forming a dense set of points on the line) where you have a spherical black hole.
I suppose you could consider dense set of ever smaller black holes as a singularity, but this type of thing is not in the spirit of the conjecture, since you could set this up even without the black string, just by having matter which collapses black holes at position $m/2^n$, of mass $1/8^m$ (say) where m is the power of 2 in the denominator of $m/2^n$ after you reduce the factors of 2 in m. The result is a bunch of cloaked singularities, not a singular line (at least not in the physical sense).
The issue is subtle because of these sort of scale-invariant situations, but there is no good violation of cosmic censorship today.
At this stage we really do not know. There are plenty of reasons to think the CCC holds. Classical gravity does not predict the CCC, and we must impose it. In the thread
Do traversable wormholes exist as solutions to string theory?
I argue this leads to some funny predictions with elementary string theory. So it might be that string theory rules out solutions to the Einstein field equations which violate the CCC. If this does not happen it could then be quantum gravity, in what ever form it might end up as, prevents violations of the CCC in the classical limit. In that setting there might be quantum paths which traverse spacetime in the opposite time direction, but where these paths destructively interfere at the WKB or classical limits. Another possibility is that violations of the CCC are permitted, but where the physical solutions are simply very unstable. So a wormhole might exist, but where the smallest perturbation send the solution into another form. So on the solution space,or moduli, these solutions are isolated points --- give it a tweek and it moves off that solution type.
So these are not answers, but possible ways to think about the problem. At this time we have no definative answer.
It's actually the case that we expect cosmic censorship to be false for a quantum theory.
The reason why is that one consequence of classical relativity, any of the positive energy conditions, and cosmic censorship is that the area of a black hole must always increase (the so-called Area Increase Theorem). But, if there is Hawking radiation coming from the black hole, then the area of the black hole must decrease. If this is the case, the apparent horizon of the black hole fails to trap matter inside the black hole.
So far, you haven't contradicted cosmic censorship--we can just interpret the Hawking radiation as a negative-energy matter distribution. If your starting spacetime had a timelike singularity, however, as is the case for a charged or spinning black hole${}^{1}$, it will then be possible for a null ray originating from the singularity to leave the black hole interior and reach null infinity--light from the singularity will escape the hole. This is very definitely a violation of cosmic censorship.
${}^{1}$The picture on the right in the link is the penrose-carter diagram for the Nordstrom spacetime, which represents a black hole with a net charge. The upward direction represents motion toward the future, and 45${}^{\circ}$ angles represent the paths of light rays. The diamond directly below the pictured x-axis reprensents the portion of the spacetime containing a black hole (and not a white hole, which would be the diamonds above and below this one). You can see the CC-violating path by letting the pictured horizon move upward--in this case, the 45${}^{\circ}$ rays from the bottom of the singularity will be able to leave the BH interior and reach the "ordinary space" region.
If the cosmic censorship conjecture does not hold, there are problems with causality in that the universe would cease to be deterministic. One could say that QM is probabilistic, but that is a misunderstanding. The Schrodinger wave equation is deterministic. Quantum mechanics is deterministic about the probabilities. General relativity is deterministic. Situations where the CCC seem to be violated, as in the Kerr-Newman metric for spinning black holes, may not occur because of other limiting factors arising -"-Solving the above effective potential equation for the maximum under the given conditions results in a maximum potential of exactly e^2-1/2! Testing other values shows that no particle with enough angular momentum to violate the censorship conjecture would be able to enter the black hole, because they have too much angular momentum to fall in."--from Hartle's Gravity
The issue is far from settled, although, gut reaction is that it holds. (Eventhough, when asked for his gut reaction about some other thing, Carl Sagan replied "I prefer not to think with my gut." :)


text:
ORCA students dive deep into marine science
Purchase Photo Reprint Dan Bates / The Herald
In September, ORCA student Sophia Navarro examines a sea anemone attached to kelp at a dock in Sharpe Cove, just across a narrow strip of land from Rosario Beach. This anemone is a stinging nematocyst, but its stingers are folded inward while it is out of the water. It is white rather than green because it lives in water with little or no algae present.
No books. No labs. No lecture.
Instead, the faculty and their students were on a beach near Deception Pass State Park.
The 90 students from Ocean Research College Academy gathered scientific data about the Salish Sea ecosystem. Up at sunrise and unperturbed by rain, they examined sea stars before the tide came in and tracked porpoises feeding in the changing currents offshore. In their analysis, students hypothesized about what the data might mean.
Inside the Rosario Beach Marine Lab, which hosted their two-day visit, students opened textbooks only because they wanted information. The teachers made meals and posed tough questions for the group to discuss. The place buzzed.
"Our trip to Deception Pass is a great start to the year," Alexis Dittoe*, 17, said.
Alexis, who plays softball for Everett High School, is in her second year at the academy. When her high school friends had returned to class in the days before the academy year began in late September, Alexis spent time near Jetty Island collecting plankton for her final research project.
Alexis calls the academy by its acronym, ORCA, and says she loves it.
The academy is celebrating its 10th year and recently received a $220,000 grant from the National Science Foundation to buy its own tugboat-sized research vessel.
ORCA is part of Everett Community College's Running Start program and funded through the college. In lieu of finishing their junior and senior years at their respective high schools, ORCA students simultaneously earn credits at the academy to graduate, with their freshman and sophomore college years completed as well. Like other Running Start participants, ORCA students do not pay tuition.
It's an intense program focused on math, science, English and history. Prospective ORCA students from throughout Snohomish County competitively apply to attend. Each year, there is a waiting list.
The school is getting national attention, and director Ardi Kveven (pronounced Kweven) regularly is invited to talk about ORCA at education conferences across the country.
"ORCA is about our local environment, which makes it relevant for our students," Kveven said. "But this early college idea can be emulated and adapted for just about any context. Students collect data, analyze that data and show their results. It's not about a teacher telling you what you need to know, but more about you doing some research that provides evidence to support your ideas."
Sharing results took on an important nature during the past school year when a biologist from the state ferry system asked to see data collected by ORCA students at the south end of Possession Sound.
A new Mukilteo ferry terminal is in the works, and the biologist wanted to know the habits of seals and other marine mammals so construction won't interfere with their habitat.
"Nobody else had the data we did," Kveven said. "Our students are proud of what we do. We start by building a general understanding of the region and then we break it down into environmental issues."
"We are appreciated for our research. We are treated like adults," said student Danica Buse, 17. "And for kids like me that's a good thing."
Dan Bates / The Herald
From left, Sophia Navarro, Taylor Campbell and Jacob Smidt examine sea slug eggs on a large piece of kelp at Sharpe Cove in September.
"I knew by fifth grade that I wanted to be a marine biologist," Kveven said.
During her undergraduate work at the University of Washington, Kveven spent as much time as she could at the UW marine science labs at Friday Harbor on San Juan Island working closely with her professors.
"It wasn't long before I knew that I also wanted to teach," she said.
After years teaching oceanography at North Kitsap and Snohomish high schools, Kveven began to doubt what she could accomplish in a traditional school setting.
"I sure couldn't take my students to the beach in the hour set aside for class," she said. "So I quit."
Al Friedman, Everett Community College's dean of math and science, got a visit one day from Kveven, who had been one of his geology students at the UW.
"Ardi was frustrated by the limitations of regular high school science programs and the lack of room to be innovative," Friedman said. Kveven proposed the establishment of a special Running Start program focused on science. Friedman told her that money wasn't available.
"So she said, 'Well, we'll get a Gates grant.' With Ardi, I know it's just a matter of time until she gets what she wants," Friedman said. "So we applied and we got the grant."
The Gates Foundation paid for the startup costs in a three-year grant. The first year was spent writing the curriculum, finding the faculty and setting it all up. In addition, the National Science Foundation later gave the academy a grant to build a college-level research laboratory at the school.
"After we had everything ready to go, I went around to the county's high schools to sell the idea to students," Kveven said. "I encouraged them to take a risk with us. I think it has paid off."
Friedman agreed.
"ORCA students are getting an incredible education," he said. "If this was just a college program, and not for high school students, it would still be amazing. The fact is that ORCA is better than just about any early college program I have ever seen."
Dan Bates / The Herald
In September, students in the ORCA program examine eggs on kelp that had been attached to the dock at Sharpe Cove.
All study at the academy is based on hands-on research by students. It is made relevant because students are studying about the place where they live. And they are expected to form supportive, collegial relationships with their fellow students, their teachers and the community.
ORCA has four teachers -- along with Kveven also teaching -- and is located in classrooms in a Port of Everett building on the waterfront near Scuttlebutt Brewing Co.
Since Kveven first organized ORCA in 2003, more than 300 people have graduated from the academy. There were 30 students in ORCA's first class, which graduated in 2006. The class of 2015 has 49 students from high schools throughout the county.
Most leave with an associate degree and go straight on to universities around the country where, with the help of scholarships, they earn bachelor's degrees in two or three years. About 66 percent of ORCA graduates go into science, technology, engineering and math, often referred to as STEM.
Alumni include medical doctors, engineers, researchers and a doctoral candidate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Of course, not all graduates go to MIT or other top science schools. Nor are all of them math and science majors, Kveven said.
The strong emphasis at ORCA on writing, reading, thinking critically and asking questions has resulted in at least one graduate going into communications.
"Students leave here knowing how to communicate well in order to present their ideas," Kveven said.
Sara DeLand, 20, graduated from ORCA two years ago. She is in her third and final year at Western Washington University, where she is studying for a degree in marine biology, with minors in Latin and chemistry. Her experience at ORCA paved the way for paid summer research internships with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to study sea turtles in North Carolina and at Western's Shannon Point marine research station in Anacortes to gather data about oxygen depletion in the waters of Bellingham Bay.
Next year, she plans to enter a graduate program at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Massachusetts to focus on octopus research.
"It all started at ORCA," DeLand said. "The best thing was our hands-on research."
The research includes traveling in their inflatable boat from the dock out in front of the school to Jetty Island to gather data. Students also take monthly cruises so they can add data to the school's ongoing study called the State of Possession Sound. Students measure plankton, heavy metals, nutrients, dissolved oxygen, salinity and water temperature. They also maintain a survey of marine mammals and birds.
DeLand's mother, Karen DeLand of Mill Creek, said her daughter knew in sixth grade that she wanted to attend ORCA.
"I had my doubts. It was outside of the normal educational track," Karen DeLand said. "But now we are so proud of Sarah. It's amazing that she is only 20 years old and she's already had all these opportunities. She would not have flourished in regular high school the way she did at ORCA."
About 70 percent of the students at ORCA are young women.
Some students, including the young men, say this is because teen girls are more organized than teen boys and it takes a lot of work to apply to the school. Kveven said the school does draw a lot of high-achieving girls and that one of the faculty's goals has been to get more women into careers in math and science.
"I don't know why we have more girls," Kveven said. "Are girls just more attracted to marine science? Or do they appreciate the support and teamwork here? Maybe," she said. "Or perhaps ORCA is just a place where it's OK to be a girl who is smart."
Dan Bates / The Herald
Teacher Robin Araniva (left) spreads a piece of kelp out on the dock on Sharpe Cove in September while students Jacob Smidt (in red), Taylor Campbell (front, in blue) and Sophia Navarro study eggs attached to it.
"Being that I have a younger perspective on this issue and the threats it poses, I have become increasingly concerned for the state of our oceans and what it means for my generation and the generations to follow," he wrote. "Ocean acidification is the nasty twin of atmospheric climate change."
Robin Araniva, Wendy Houston, Shelly Jordan-Zirkle and Josh Searle said teaching at ORCA is a dream job. Searle is the English teacher and, students said, the guy who has most helped them learn how to fail.
"This is a terrific place and time in their lives to respond to difficulty and struggle and what to do when a document doesn't say what you had expected," Searle said.
There are no easy A's at ORCA. Failure is something that a scientist has to get used to in order to find the facts, said student Sierra Nicholson, 17, who plans to become an American Sign Language interpreter. She and her friends were shocked when Searle returned their first essays.
"Our hearts sank when we saw our grades," Kaylie Gray, 17, said. Kaylie is a scuba diver who plans to study marine biology at Oregon State University.
"Most of us were A students in high school, but we were still writing at a middle school level," said Danica Buse, who hopes to become an osteopath. "Our rewritten essays were college-level and beautiful."
Roland Upenieks, 17, sat outside on the deck at the Rosario Beach Marine Lab near Deception Pass on the first day of school.
His final project at ORCA will be the creation of a map showing trends in the changes of the chemistry and water temperatures of Possession Sound. Next year, he plans to study chemical engineering at the University of Washington.
"I am glad my parents pushed me to apply to ORCA and that I got in," Roland said. "I would not have gotten the same level of instruction in my high school or in the regular Running Start program. My teachers are amazing."
Gale Fiege: 425-339-3427; firstname.lastname@example.com.
Free lecture
Over the summer, ORCA students were required to read the book "Where the Wild Things Were: Vanishing Predators and the Balance of Nature" by wildlife journalist William Stolzenburg. The author plans to talk about his book at a free public lecture set for 6 p.m. Thursday in the Wilderness Room in Jackson Center, Everett Community College.
* Correction, Oct. 7, 2013: This article originally had an incorrect spelling for Alexis Dittoe.
More Local News Headlines
Top stories and breaking news updates


text:
Cervelli: I Didn't Get PEDs
Yankees Catcher Acknowledges Visiting Clinic That's Under MLB Scrutiny
TAMPA, Fla.—Yankees catcher Francisco Cervelli acknowledged visiting a South Florida anti-aging clinic that is under investigation by Major League Baseball, but he said it was a one-time consultation and that he didn't receive performance-enhancing drugs.
"I went there, I asked questions, I walked away with nothing in my hand," Cervelli said Wednesday, the first day of workouts for pitchers and catchers at Yankees camp. "Right now, I realized that maybe it was a mistake to go there, but it already happened, so what can I do?"
MLB began an investigation into the clinic, Biogenesis of America, after a Miami New Times report last month alleged that the clinic had distributed PEDs to baseball players, including teammate Alex Rodriguez.
Rodriguez has repeatedly denied any involvement with the clinic and has called the documents described in the New Times story illegitimate. The documents allegedly are patient records that detail who had appointments and what drugs they received. Chuck Strouse, editor of Miami New Times, has said the documents "speak for themselves. We did everything possible, including verifying dozens of phone numbers and interviewing two employees from the clinic, to verify them."
On Wednesday, asked if Cervelli's acknowledgment that he visited the clinic has caused Rodriguez to view the documents differently, Rodriguez spokesman Terry Fahn restated Rodriguez's position that the documents are false—as they pertain to Rodriguez.
Bosch's attorney, Susy Ribero-Ayala, declined to comment. A statement released by Bosch's attorney two weeks ago said the New Times story "is filled with inaccuracies" and that Bosch denies the assertions that MLB players, such as Rodriguez, were treated by or associated with him.
Cervelli said he sought advice from the clinic, and its principal, Anthony Bosch, in early 2011 after breaking his foot during spring training.
"Sometimes when we've got injuries, we get a little desperate to come back quick and we always want a second opinion," Cervelli said. "I went there. Somebody told me. That's it."
Cervelli declined to say who recommended the clinic, but said it wasn't one of his fellow players nor anyone connected with his former agency, ACES, run by brothers Seth and Sam Levinson, the agents for several players linked with the clinic. The Levinsons didn't respond to requests for comment Wednesday.
Cervelli also said that he had never spoken with Rodriguez about the clinic.
When asked for comment, MLB spokesman Pat Courtney said, "Our investigation regarding this issue in South Florida remains ongoing."
Write to Daniel Barbarisi at firstname.lastname@example.com


text: I have always wanted to do Snoop Dogg because of his gorgeous braids. This man is a music rapper giant that is set apart all the rest because of his soft speaking voice. Not only does he rap, but he also is a singer-songwriter, record producer and actor. This tutorial was drawn a little differently. Instead of using pencils/pastels, I've used my digital program SAI. Let me know what you think of this tut by commenting, faving or clicking on "Love It"! Peace n love to ya!


text:
For example, what is the difference between the following two sentences:
I had a bad day
I had had a bad day
For example, what is the difference between the following two sentences:
'Had' is the past form as well as the past participle of 'have'.
The first sentence is in the simple past tense which typically has this form:
Subject + past form of verb
The simple past is used normally to denote an action that is completed in the past.
The second sentence is in the past perfect tense which has this form:
Subject + had + past participle of verb
If two non-consecutive events happened in the past, this tense is used to show the first event.
= The party began. Then we arrived.
= They ate all the food; then we arrived.
= I was having a bad day. During the day my home was robbed. Then I arrived home and found out about the robbery.
Refer to Kajaco's example as well. Here, the past perfect is used to show which incident/action happened first.
Consider this sentence:
This is the past perfect form with the verb eat. This uses the past participle ( 3rd form) of the verb.
There's an idiomatic difference between "to have a bad day" and "to be having a bad day". The first (mostly) refers to external events and the second (mostly) to your internal reaction to them (mood, headache, etc.) - but there's no bright-line separation between them, just as there isn't in life. Perhaps fully-enlightened Buddhists or Stoics can completely separate external events from their own reactions to them - but then, a fully-enlightened Buddhist or Stoic wouldn't refer to any particular day as being "bad", either.
It might be helpful to ring all the changes on this phrase and see how its meaning shifts:
This evening you will tell your wife, "I crashed the car because I had a bad day." Later this month you will explain to the insurance adjuster, "I crashed my car because I had had a bad day."
Just for fun: http://www.reocities.com/oosterwal/puzzle/had.htm
The first sentence uses the simple past of the verb "to have".
The second sentence uses the pluperfect (past perfect).
I'm not sure, but as the schoolboy put it...
"I had 'had', where I would have had 'had had', if 'had had' had had the teacher's approval."
You are asking about the difference between these. If you are asking about meanings, then the first is a simple statement of fact that stands alone. The second implies another thought coming with it, such as
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?