text:
I read a similar thread, in reverse, about one child families and whether they judge large families, and I thought it would be interesting to see how we think.
So, do you judge families with one child? Do you have an immediate internal reaction when you find out someone has an only? Even if you would never actually say something out loud to someone, do certain perceptions and judgements cross your mind?
Do you judge families with one child?
I read a similar thread, in reverse, about one child families and whether they judge large families, and I thought it would be interesting to see how we think.
♫ Melissa ~ Mom to Hero 16, Allegra 14, Ian 12, Colin 9, Cecily 7, Elinor 5, and Graeme Paul born 10/6/15
I'll get started. I can honestly say that I don't think I make negative judgements when I find out that someone has just one child. I might think "hmm, I wonder if she and I will have anything in common?" or I might worry about how she will perceive me and my family, but I can't say that I make any judgements prior to getting to know the family.
♫ Melissa ~ Mom to Hero 16, Allegra 14, Ian 12, Colin 9, Cecily 7, Elinor 5, and Graeme Paul born 10/6/15
No, no judgments. I know several people who tried and tried to have more children, but only were able to have the one. You just never know what that family's situation is. I don't think I know anyone with one child who didn't have any more for "selfish" reasons, kwim? It was either they weren't able to have more, or they were in financial dire straits or there was hardship in the marriage/divorce, etc.
Michelle ~ Me (44) DH (42) DS (9) DD (7) ^^i^^ (10/11) DS (3)
Technically most of the year I have an only and I miss the days when we have both kids. Though one time I was out with a freind who has three girls and me with the two girls, and they were going nuts and I turned to my friend and said 'remind me why I want more kids?' But her kids are far more er active than my two, so I think it may have just been me overwhelmed by her kids than the number of them. I kind of feel bad for onlies, cause they don't have a built in playmate, but then they get all the parental attention and money. There are plenty of studies about it, onlies are more this or that, middles are this or that... I think all familes gotta do whats right for them . However I would NEVER say soemthing to anyone about their family size. Though I did tease my friend with three, 'so your littlest is two now, you planning another?' cause all her kids are about 2 year apart.
I dont judge them because I dont really know WHY they only have one. When I see a family with an only child which I know some, I assume they couldn't have more maybe?
I have never met a family irl that said they dont wanna have more babies simply bc they dont like having more.
One thing is for sure to each his own. Who am I to judge?
Come join us at the "Daily Bible Reading" Board!
Lord, you are the Shepherd of my heart!
Honestly, the number of children one has doesn't phase me. I don't think about it much and never assume anything. We had an "only" for a while before we changed our minds. I know a bunch of kids isn't for everybody, just as having none or 1 isn't as well.
3Girls(00,08,10)& 2Boys(06,12) **Proud Air Force Family since 1996**
I don't know that I judge ppl with one child but I do wonder about them and why they would choose that. I was an only child though, and I do judge my own parents for that because I think it was a selfish decision on their part and it was not the best thing for me.
I don't judge parents of only children...sometimes I do find myself judging the child---most of the only children that my daughter play with are the ones that go home in a rampage when things don't go their own way, and then come back 5 minutes later and expect things to cater their way. They're also the ones who start drama (for example, DD 's bff is an only, and they were playing house and both wanted to be the mom. BFF said 'why don't we have a coloring contest and whoever wins gets to be mom'. BFFs mom judged and said my DD was the best, well then the BFF had a meltdown because she wanted to win, and decided she didn't want to play anymore). I noticed that DD gets along much better with her friends who have siblings. It could be a coincidence, but it's a trend that I've noticed. DH and I say DD's BFF has only-child-syndrome, and we know when she comes over it will end with tears.
Mom to Allyson 02/04, Aiden 03/08 (ASD, SPD & ADHD), Jude (Estropia/Amblyopia) 05/09, Joel 08/12 (ASD), and Charlie 12/13 (ASD). Expecting Elizabeth 05/16.
(Copied and Pasted from Word - I wrote this at work and needed it to look like I was working, so I'm sorry for any weird characters) ~MandieMommy
I don't think I know any families of onlies other than a couple who stopped with one because of that child's health issues, or because of marital issues. Honestly, I "judge" couples who remain childless more than parents of onlies.
Nothing fancy Mom of 4 :-)
"To everything there is a season." Ecc. 3:1
I only laugh when they say how hard it is. My sister had one for 7 years before she had another and she always said how hard it was. umm yeah try having 6!
Crunchy mom to 6, soon to be 7.


text:
Please enter a maximum of 5 recipients. Use ; to separate more than one email address.
Exports of crude oil from northern Iraq have been suspended after a new bomb attack against a key pipeline, a Middle East shipping agent said. The attack took place at the north of the al-Shurgat area north of Baiji, some 200 kilometers north of the capital, Baghdad.
By HASSAN HAFIDH
Exports of crude oil from northern Iraq have been suspended
after a new bomb attack against a key pipeline, an Iraqi person
familiar with the matter and a Middle East shipping agent said,
the second such interruption in less than a week.
Iraq normally exports an average of 300,000 to 350,000 bpd
via the pipeline, which carries crude from the Kirkuk oil
fields to the Turkish port of Ceyhan.
"The attackers blew up part of the pipeline using six bombs
planted underneath the line," a person familiar with the matter
told Dow Jones Newswires.
The attack took place at the north of the al-Shurgat area
north of Baiji, some 200 kilometers north of the capital,
Baghdad, he said.
A Middle East shipping agent in the Mediterranean port of
Ceyhan confirmed that the flow has been stopped.
Last week the pipeline was cut in a similar location in
order to smuggle the crude. Flows resumed after the damaged
section was repaired. It may take three days to repair the
section of pipe that was destroyed, the Iraqi person said.
Shipping agents said they managed to pump some 2.6 million
barrels of oil before the new attack.
Three vessels are waiting in port in Ceyhan to load with
Kirkuk crude, the shipping agent said.
The Iraq-Turkey pipeline has frequently suffered attacks,
sometimes inside Turkey and on other occasions inside Iraq. The
pipeline was idle for many years due to acts of sabotage after
the United States led invasion in 2003.
All comments are subject to editorial review.
All fields are compulsory.
Sign-up for the Free Daily HP Enewsletter!
A searchable database of project activity in the global hydrocarbon processing industry
Engineers and designers are highly skilled individuals. Forcing them to enter design changes using tables, forms and spreadsheets is unproductive and uneconomical, and it increases the likelihood of human error—this is the way that most instrumentation software systems currently work. For too long, software vendors have denied engineers and designers the simple practicality of a graphical visual engineering interface with "drag and drop" capability and inbuilt intelligence, ensuring changes are automatically replicated into all the associated data and databases.
Is 2016 the peak for US gasoline demand?
Too soon to tell
July 2016

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Specifically, in the expression 好きなんだ (I love you) why not just say 好きだ or 好きです?
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
It's hard to answer this specific question without getting into the more general topic of the ~のだ construction, which, as jkerian mentioned, can mark an explanation for a certain context, which may be either explicit or implicit. Put succinctly, ~のだ provides supporting information. This information is often a reason, but it may be a cause, basis, conclusion, restatement, or confession. Because it is supporting, ~のだ tends to shift the focus away from the information it marks. (This is in contrast to ~から, which often draws more focus toward the information it follows.)
(Bill Nye voice) Consider the following:
In sentence (2), A asks a question with ~のか, the question form of ~のだ. This connects the question to sentence (1) and shows that the answer to the question will provide a basis for the fact that B wasn't in the office last week. (Sentence (2) could actually be left out entirely. In this case, B may anticipate sentence (2) as an unspoken question and answer with the exact same sentence (3) as above.) In sentence (3), B provides the supporting information that A is looking for, and since it is supporting information, it is marked with ~のだ (~んだ in speech).
From an English perspective, a sentence without ~のだ looks exactly like one with ~のだ, because in English we tend to leave these inter-sentence connections unspoken. This is part of why the ~のだ construction is difficult to grasp. You could theoretically force an English rendition, but at the expense of naturalness:
Now from general to specific. In your question, it's difficult to say why the speaker would use 好きなんだ over 好きだ, since we have no context. But ~のだ is often used in confessing something the listener would have a hard time knowing. (This also counts as supporting information, since its purpose is to fill in a gap in the listener's understanding.) So 好きなんだ would be preferable to 好きだ in that context:
好きなんだ is better here because the first half raises a question in the listener's mind (What hasn't she been able to say until now?). Since the second half is designed to anticipate and answer that question, it's marked with ~んだ. 好きだ would technically convey the same information, but without の/ん you lose that connection between thoughts and the sentence doesn't flow as well in Japanese.
なんだ is a pattern that is sometimes called the "extended predicate". The exact best way to express this in English is subject to debate.
Usually the usage follows a pattern of explanation of some question that either has been asked explicitly or could be asked implicitly. For example, if A-san is telling B-san that s/he wants to go with B-san to Tokyo, "好きなんだ" provides an explanation of why A-san wants to go.
My personal choice of translating this is to use the form "It's that..." or the longer form "It is the case that...". Although this is not a precise translation, but in some contexts it provides a workable distinction from the translation of the more direct "好きだ".


text:
Norah's Knits: Crochet Red
Yes, I do knit way more than I crochet, but the craft I learned first – the one that really got me started making up my own designs – is crochet. So when Laura Zander asked me for a design for her book, Crochet Red, I didn't hesitate. I even whipped up the piece myself, which turned out to be a fun break from knitting! Read more


text:
How to Make the Ultimate Thick, Creamy Milk Shake (02:38)
Supersweet, watered-down milk shakes are nobody's idea of a good time. Tyler Malek, head ice cream maker at Salt & Straw in Portland, Oregon, has a few tips to help you achieve a thick, velvety milk shake every time without turning it into a sugar bomb.
Search Videos


text:
I have tried verifying the numerical integration of the Coriolis effect for 1000 to 2000-yard rifle fire by switching ON/OFF the Coriolis correction of a good ballistic simulator program (PRODAS). The program integrates an instantaneously evaluated Coriolis acceleration along with the aerodynamic and gravitational accelerations. My calculations yield about 10 percent larger Coriolis effects than the delta after the same number of timeslice intervals are computed in two otherwise identical simulation runs. I theorize that the integrated Coriolis effect should be independent of the path between the two end-points of any segment of a terrestrial trajectory. If so, the velocity used in the instantaneous Coriolis acceleration can be replaced with the displacement vector of the projectile divided by the time-of-flight over the flight segment. The displacement is just the vector difference between the projectile positions at the ends of the flight segment. And the cumulative Coriolis effect over a segment becomes just the displacement vector crossed with the earth rotation rate vector multiplied by the time-of-flight. I speculate that the directly integrated "instantaneous Coriolis force" produces some along-track component that should not be allowed. An additional "normalizing constraint" is needed. The constraint should be perpendicularity to the displacement vector as above. I can e-mail a 3200-word tech note about this question as an attachment in Word or PDF file format to anyone who would like it.
The cumulative Coriolis effect must be independent of the path between the two end-points of the flight segment to which it applies. The Coriolis effect is entirely due to the motion of the observer and not to that of the object. Direct integration of the instantaneous Coriolis acceleration over a curved trajectory introduces error in the resulting Coriolis effect to the same extent that it introduces path-dependence. That commonly used approach only works for straight-line trajectories. My path-independent approach to calculating the Coriolis effect (described in the question), a direct integration of Coriolis acceleration approach, and, indeed, a "conservation of angular momentum" approach to calculating the eastward deflection of an object that is carefully released to fall within a vacuum tower 50 meters in height located at sea-level on the mean equator all produce the same answer: 11.643 mm east of plumb. I used 6,378,137 m as the earth-centric radius to the base of the tower, 9.8066 m/s/s as the effective acceleration of gravity (including the "centrifugal acceleration" effect), and 7.2921 times ten to the minus five rad/s as the rotation rate of the earth. All calculations are carried to five significant figures. It might help in seeing all of this to consider the instantaneous Coriolis acceleration (a function of the instantaneous apparent velocity of the body) as the limiting case of a time-averaged Coriolis acceleration (a function of the object's time-averaged apparent velocity) over shorter time and distance intervals. The time-averaged apparent velocity of the object is just the apparent spatial displacement vector of the object divided by its temporal displacement between the two state vectors bounding the flight segment being considered. My tech note on this has grown to 5500 words and is available upon request. Addendum: I just worked out the example "tower drop" problem much more carefully. The eastward deflection is proportional to the 3/2 power of the height of the drop or to the cube of the fall time. I used a hybrid height-times-fall-time, but it is trickier. Both a "conservation of angular momentum" approach and a "direct integration of Coriolis acceleration" approach yield 2/3 of my previous result, or 7.7620 mm. The difference would vary with other types of problems. This counter-example blows up my theorem of "independence of path" for the Coriolis effect. The integration of the Coriolis acceleration is still the only way to go in the general case. The tech note mentioned has been withdrawn. "Nevermind..." Jim


text:
John Deere Boots for Boys
Sophias Style is thrilled to be carrying John Deere Boys Boots for all those little farmers out there! Whether he's going to be out milking the cows, driving the tractors or heading off to his first day of school, he'll love wearing his trusty John Deere boots. You can shop wellington boots, rain boots, western boots and even soft sole boots for your baby boy! Find a variety of infant boots and children's boots for your boy at SophiasStyle.com!
John Deere Boys Boots
Sophias Style carries John Deere boots for boys! Shop some of their most popular styles, including the John Deere Wellington boots, camo boots, rain boots and Western boots. Make sure you check out our detailed size charts to ensure you get the right size! We carry boots for infants, toddlers, and little boys.


text:
BELTON (November 22, 2012)—Visitors to the Bell County Museum in Belton will have a chance to make their own Christmas ornaments from noon until 4 p.m. on Dec. 8.
The free event includes hot holiday punch, cookies and music.
Visitors can craft rustic bandana stars, balls and also a cowboy lasso ornament, the museum said.
"Since so much of our local history is tied to our western roots, these darling ornaments are perfect for any Texas Christmas tree. But the best part of the workshop is the fun time that is shared when friends and family make the ornaments together," Stephanie Turnham, museum director, said,
For more information about the workshop, call the museum at (254) 933-5243.


text:
Data Quality Part 1: RSR Completeness Reports
Data Quality Part 1: RSR Completeness Reports
Event Date: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 - 4:00pm EDT
This webcast will summarize 2011 RSR data completeness. We'll highlight improvements and remaining challenges. We'll also show you how to download your Completeness Report. The webcast will conclude with a question and answer period and grantees will have an opportunity to speak with TA contractors about technical assistance needs related to data completeness.
(Note: Prior to joining the webinar, please check to see that you meet the minimum system requirements for GoToWebinar. To test your GoToMeeting connection, click the link to join a test session Join a session! If you are still experiencing challenges, contact Global Customer Support at 1-888-259-8414.)


text:
If a question is posed "How do I fit this square here on this here car so that it gives a smooth ride?" and it comes with all the requisites to be a valid SO question (description, code, error messages, bolts & wrenches), do I then answer "Fit it like so and make sure you tighten the bolts properly" or do I start off by saying "You can't possibly want that, so I'll assume you want a circular wheel instead and then you proceed like so..."?
In other words, should I consider - and possibly change - the context of the OP and give the answer cast in a specified context that makes more sense to me, or do I first point out to the OP that the context is shaky and that s/he better review that first and re-state the question?


text:
April 13, 2012
friday pinspiration
for example, coffee time. alone or with a friend. probably one of my most favorite things to do.
walking in a pretty field. i have to admit, i haven't done this in awhile, but i'd very much like to someday soon.
sitting, overlooking some pretty scenery. dear universe- can i do this anywhere, anytime, as soon as possible please?
eating breakfast. i'm pretty sure i did that... this morning. but it probably didn't look this cute. maybe someday i'll have that wallpaper and it will. i've already got the teapot...
i also heart these heart bricks. and i heart how i realized that if you slap a heart on anything at all, it becomes a metaphor.
some various orange things...
no pinspiration is complete without at least one kitty.
and well, two kitties are always better than one.
i'm really really really, REALLY smitten over these initial necklaces.
wish i was there right now.
was recently enamored by this magical ruby slipper.
really want to try this "wooden" can diy!
did anything eventful happen in your world this week?
i've been doing stuff for my release party on tuesday! the guest posts have been slowly rolling in, and i'm super excited. tomorrow i'll be posting a finalized list of everyone contributing. it's gonna be sick.
also... the EP will be officially available! you've been able to preorder it thus far, but on tuesday, it will be officially available for purchase...
that is, if you've already placed an order, it will finally be sent to you after tuesday. if you purchased a digital copy, it will be automatically emailed to you! and if you order after tuesday, everything will go normally as planned.
i'm sorry if that sounds confusing... i think i just confused myself. and i know i'm talking about my cd a lot, but it might be the closest thing to a baby i'll ever have :)
11 comments:
what would the world do without pinterest!ReplyDelete
Those wood tins are amazing, and I've already pre-ordered your album. Can't wait to get the email!! :DReplyDelete
What a nice selection of photos! ;) And coffee time and eating time in general are my favorite things, too :p.ReplyDelete
By the way, I'm working on my guest post. I might have to send it tomorrow because we're having company today :/. You'll get it before Monday, for sure.
Have an awesome weekend! ;D
Oh my ....eye candy delight. Several of these are surely going to wind up on my tumblr. Looking forward to your party Chantilly. I just got my swag from you in the mail yesterday....yay!!! Thank you so much...the skirt is a beauty. I've already worn it...how is that for eager? And of course I couldn't say enough about the album:) Have a lovely weekend lady!!ReplyDelete
Such cute photos. I love the one of the glitter heels.ReplyDelete
Those cats are adorable! (I'm a bit of a crazy cat lady, haha).ReplyDelete
I love those initial necklaces and the ruby slippers!
Sharleena xx
those shoes are soo fab!!ReplyDelete
Ohhhh! Chantilly, you are the sweetest! I just squealed out loud when I saw my beach on here - you darling!ReplyDelete
And ummm.... those shoes, the heart bricks and that kitchen - WOW!
And thanks again for the comment the other day - I had to come over here for a peek, and I'm loving your blog!!
Mmm those shoes are delightful. And I spy the Rock N' Roll Bride in the background :PReplyDelete


text:
Please include names of any local varieties which taste great and list places where you can get cheap chocolates.
closed as off-topic by Dirty-flow, Gayot Fow, CMaster, Rory Alsop, JoErNanO Mar 31 at 9:29
Beryl's tastes good to me, especially their Tiramisu line.
I bought it in Thailand, but it's made in Malaysia, so it should be widely available.
For cheap chocolate, I will usually go for Langkawi. Few chocolate merchant like Haji Ismail Group (HIG) can be found around Langkawi and HQ at Kuah, where they sell quite number of local and international brand at very cheap price. (e.g. cheapest Daim is around RM 17 - Jan 2014)
For local made chocolate, I will go for Beryl's. The factory is in Serdang (around 25KM from KL) where I can buy all type of chocolate they produce at better price.
A search reveals two oft-mentioned Malaysian chocolate companies:
Both websites look absolutely amazing! :)


text:
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Miss TDP Dollmaker-Round Six! - 11-22-2009, 06:14 PM
Welcome to the first ever Miss TDP competition! Before continuing to the theme for round six, we ask that all members read the following rules and procedures if they are competing.
The public has decided and now we must say goodbye to our competitor, jordanashley. Congrats to her for working so hard! The following members are still competing in this competition and are the only ones allowed to post here:
THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION THREAD NOR IS IT THE PLACE TO SUBMIT HANDDRAWN DOLLS! Before you post here, I suggest you stop. All non-entry posts will be deleted. If you have questions, direct them to Silver_Wolf_Kitty. If you want to discuss the contest, the official Miss TDP clique(found here) is suggested.
1. Character. When entering Miss TDP, you need to enter with one character and stay with it the entire time. This means that your dolls hair, eye, and skin colour must remain the same throughout, unless otherwise stated in the round theme.
2. Base. You must use the same base set throughout, so pick one with a variety of poses. This base should also be medium in size for handdrawn dollers (comparable in size to the "Moe" bases here: DHF : Doll on the Hill Factory). Dollmaker users should use the shuni style base.
3. Theft. No stealing the work of another. This applies to both handdrawn and dollmaker participants, so do not submit a doll that someone else made or, for handdrawn dollers, mix and match pieces of completed dolls that are not your own. All work should be original and failure to comply will result in disqualification.
4. Props. Props and backgrounds are encouraged, but should not be massive. We will ask too large of entries to reduce their size, so be reasonable.
5. Transparency. We ask that all dolls have transparent background and is a GIF file. If you dont know how to do this, see the following thread: How to Make Backgrounds Transparent
6. Forbidden. Sexually explicit, nudity(artistic nudity must be okayed first by Silver_Wolf_Kitty), or overly bloody dolls are forbidden. Entering one could result in disqualification.
7. Theme. Every doll should relate to the theme. While we encourage creativity, failure to keep with the theme can get you eliminated automatically that round.
8. Judges. No one is allowed to use friendship or promises to sway a judges decision. Threats, bribery, and attempts to interfere or discover the judges decisions in anyway will result in disqualification. Arguing with the judges can result in an automatic elimination.
9. Competing. You can only submit one entry for each cometition, so choose wisely. The rules are being changed to allow crossover, but we ask that handdrawn dollers stick to the dollmakers if they are inclined to compete in that arena.
10. Animation. Animation is forbidden in the competition. We understand that many users like glitter, blinking, etc, but it takes away from the creativity and creates an unequal playing field for those who cant animate.
The audition round procedures are no longer in place, these are the procedures that will be followed in the future.
1. Participants enter a doll every two weeks in the set thread. They may enter it sooner, however further edits are not allowed after the doll is entered. No matter what, the two weeks are a guaranteed time slot(unless all entries are received before it).
2. Any participants who fail to meet this deadline will be eliminated. Deadlines are not being extended for anyone, so do not ask. Special extensions may be asked in the event of a long trip or medical/family emergency, but you must contact Silver_Wolf_Kitty immediately if this occurs.
3. After two weeks(or when all dolls are entered), the judges will then provide critique on each entry and select a bottom two for the round.
4. Several days are given for voting on who should stay. Voting will be a public affair, but you shouldnt worry about hurting feelings. All you have to do is vote in the voting thread poll for the doll you think should go.
5. Votes are counted and the bottom participant is eliminated, then the next round begins.
The theme for round six is "Color Splash". For those who don't know what it is, here are some examples:
Photobucket | color splash Pictures, color splash Images, color splash Photos
What you have to do this round is do a monochromatic doll--with a twist. You are allowed to select one part of the doll to be colored. The rest, including hair, eyes, and skin, must be in black and white! Here is a recommended list of items to include with your doll(not all need to be included, this is simply a guideline for things we would love to see!):
Stripy stockings
Hair band
High heeled shoes
When your doll is ready, we ask participants to post their dollmaker doll in this thread. Round four will close the evening of December 6th! After that, the judges will submit their critiques and then public voting of the bottom two for the round will begin. After that, we enter our finale!
Av & Sig Credit: Me
Mmk, here's my entry. I hope it works.
I included:
High heeled shoes
Judges' Critiques
This is a wonderfully put together doll. I love the dress, and the way that she's holding it with one hand, and the recolouring is just perfect. The bouquet is a good choice as the colour splash; it's really effective as just a single splash of red that just jumps out the picture and grabs you. The border is a little blocky, and that's about my only criticism.
Aw, how adorable! I love how well the pose and props work together! It looks as if she's moving her skirt out of the way to better see the precious kitten leaning on her leg! I do love the outfit you chose, it looks like something that can be walked around in to go get a bouquet of flowers. Aw, the flowers. Perhaps a less bright color would have worked better? Pink, maybe yellow? The red definately pops, but something a bit less bold and more sublte would have matched the 'fun and cute' picture you portrayed. Had it been a love scene the red would have worked out nicely to promote passion, but it just doesn't fit here. Great job on making such a cute entry regaurdless!
This doll was well put together, and the bouquet definetly stood out. I know it's in black and white, but the shoes and the base could've been shaded a bit better to show shadows or something.
av&sig: LancasterPrincess
This is a black & white photo portrait that Ebony had done while she was on holidays in Tokyo, Ebony is very Geisha like I think, The stem of the flower is a little off but thats the way the shape of the heart went so the stem went with it, anyway she had her hair & makeup professionally done so that she looked like a Geisha (hence the eyes) I had a little trouble with the eyes & lashes the rules stated that she had to have black or white eyes so I did my best lol...Hope you like her
Maker used: PURRRFECTION (which is hidden)
Items included: Background
Judges' Critiques
All in all, this is a fantastic doll. I adore the Geisha role that Ebony is playing and the border is brilliantly styled with a lovely rose. I would prefer that there just be one colour used in a colour splash, tho. However, the doll is superbly put together, and the hat and fan are nice touches.
And such a ravishing Geisha Ebony makes! I do love the pretty ornaments in her hair and the wonderfully silky and flowing dress! But there are a few issues with this doll, both of which are pixel-based. The beautiful scrolling heart she's sitting on has a few white pixels around it, and the green to the flower is a bit edgy. I think it could have curved a bit more gracefully, but in it's rigid state I find it a little distracting. I do love the ornate frame you chose! It ties the entry together nicely. Congrats on making such a beautiful entry!
The fan looked a bit off as well as the flower stem in this doll. Mostly because there was few colours and shading used, so it came off as rushed and scratchy; a darker colour could have been used to outline them. Other than that, a beautiful doll.
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Linear Mode
|Similar Threads
|Thread Starter
|Last Post
|Miss TDP Dollmaker-Round Five!
|Doll Creation
|Miss TDP Dollmaker-Round Four
|Doll Creation
|Miss TDP-Dollmaker Round Three
|Doll Creation
|Miss TDP-Dollmaker Round Two!
|Doll Creation
|Miss TDP-Dollmaker Round One!
|Doll Creation


text:
Committee on Doctrine repeats itself.
In June, Fordham theologian Elizabeth A. Johnson, CSJ, responded [.pdf] to the USCCB Committee on Doctrine's critique [.pdf] of her book Quest for the Living God. (Read our coverage of the controversy here.) Today the committee has released its reply [.pdf] to Johnson. It follows a familiar tune.In its original statement about Quest, the Committee on Doctrine accused Johnson of failing to take the faith of the church as its starting point. Instead, the committee claimed, Johnson uses standards from outside the faith to criticize and to revise in a radical fashion the conception of God revealed in Scripture and taught by the magisterium. In her response, Johnson pointed out how badly the committee had misread her. And the latest response from the Committee on Doctrine finally affirms what anyone who had taken the time to read Johnson's book carefully would have already known:
The Committee on Doctrine acknowledges that in the Observations Sr. Elizabeth Johnson agrees that theological investigation should begin and end with the faith of the Church. The Committee commends Sr. Elizabeth Johnson for her stated intention to help the Church progress in her understanding of divine realities as described by the Second Vatican Council in Dei Verbum, no. 8.
The locution is odd--acknowledging her "stated intention" and that "in the Observations" Johnson agrees that theology begins and ends with the faith of the church--because the committee goes on to say that its members still think Quest fails to "sufficiently ground itself in the Catholic theological tradition as its starting point." I suppose one shouldn't be surprised by the committee's refusal to accept Johnson's rebuttal. After all, these are the same bishops who, in their first pass at critiquing Quest, claimed that the book lacked "any sense of the essential centrality of divine relation as the basis of Christian theology [emphasis mine]. Never mind Johnson's repeated citations of Scripture as the basis for any number of avenues she pursues in the book. The committee's response wisely notes that its complaints about Quest are about the book itself, not Johnson's intentions--just before repeating its assertion that "the doctrine of God presented in Quest for the Living God does not accord with authentic Catholic teaching on essential points."
Analogy and metaphor: The Committee of Doctrine believes the argument of Quest inevitably leads to the conclusion that "all names for God are metaphors or the functional equivalent." From the committee's response:
Throughout the book the terms "literal" and "literally" are repeatedly used to describe the way in which our names do not apply to God. The book's rejection of the terms "literal" and "literally" naturally leads the reader to assume that what the author means is "metaphorical" and "metaphorically."
The committee accuses the book of failing to differentiate between analogy, metaphor, and symbol, when it comes to naming God. Of course, Johnson's point is that when we name God we do not contain God. Yet, in that approach, the Committee on Doctrine only sees "the focus on negation with no recognition that some names can be said properly (proprie) of God only reinforces the impression that all names are reducible to metaphor." Johnson does not claim that no names can be said properly (the English suffices) of God.
Rather, in her response to the committee's initial critique, she writes, "God remains in essence conceptually inapprehensible." This confounds the Committee on Doctrine, whose members claim that idea, "without proper qualification," is more reflective of Kant than Aquinas.
Human concepts certainly cannot comprehend the essence of God. To assert without qualification that concepts do not even apprehend the essence of God, however, seems to imply that we have no knowledge at all about God. Here again the focus is only on negation and without the necessary reference to the positive element in analogy.
Seems to imply? No it does not. Johnson's project is about knowing God. She just does not want us to forget that our knowledge of God is never complete. Because God is God. Why doesn't the Committee on Doctrine grasp this part of Johnson's project? Quest's final chapter alone--on various ways of understanding the Trinity--ought to disabuse them of the notion that her "focus is only on negation and without the necessary reference to the positive element in analogy." The committee complains that the book lacks a "salutary acknowledgment" that negation isn't enough when it comes to naming God. I don't know how anyone can get through Quest for the Living God without realizing that acknowledgment is implied and affirmed throughout her work.
The committee's response doubles down on its complaint that Quest seeks to replace masculine names for God with feminine ones. That was a particularly embarrassing criticism, because Johnson has never argued for any such thing. Now the committee says, "It is true that the book does not assert that male metaphors should never be used." Which is good. But then is goes on to say that when the book talks of male names for God it's to denounce them as patriarchal tools. Not quite. But never mind. Johnson is guilty of arguing that using exclusively male names for God can lead to taking them literally--and following that argument with a discussion of biblically sourced female names for God. Apparently that is enough to force the bishops to ask, "Is it unreasonable for the reader to find in these pages a call to replace inadequate, though traditional, language for God with feminine language?" (The answer to that question, by the way, is yes.) And then, rather amazingly, the committee says:
The Observations [of Johnson] ask whether the Committee believes it is permissible to use female imagery for God. In its statement, the Committee does not exclude all possibility of using feminine imagery. The concern of the Committee was not the use of female or feminine imagery but the insinuation that traditional language based on divine revelation, such as "Father," obscures the truth about God. Certain language belongs to the deposit of divine revelation and may not be replaced, even if human reason might find some indications that to do so might be socially useful.
Good to know that the committee is on board with scripturally sourced feminine imagery of God--or at least that it doesn't exclude the idea. But Quest contains no insinuation--except in the minds of the most sensitive, hermeneutically suspicious readers--that traditional language based on divine revelation (are we supposed to forget that Johnson's examples are taken from divinely inspired Scripture?) obscures the truth about God. If you take one image of God and use it exclusively, Johnson argues, you risk obscuring the fuller reality of God. That goes for both masculine and feminine names for God.
And to conclude, the committee claims: "The reader is given no indication that certain names cannot be replaced in critical contexts because of their origin in divine revelation." Throughout this section, the Committee on Doctrine simply assumes Johnson argues for replacing masculine names for God with female ones. She denies this. The book does not support that reading. Nor does it support the insinuation of the committee that Johnson may want to ditch "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit"--maybe even at Mass. Nothing in her book, nothing in anything she has ever written, recommends such a thing. It's irresponsible of the Committee on Doctrine to suggest otherwise.
The rest of the committee's response continues in this vein--restating its original critique, drawing damning conclusions from certain lacunae, even offering a mini-discourse on the inability of science to explain self-consciousness. And in the end, we're right back where we started:
After studying these Observations, however, the Committee has found that they have not in fact demonstrated that the Committee has misunderstood or misrepresented the book. Rather, the Committee on Doctrine finds itself confirmed in its judgment about the book.
We often hear about teachable moments in the church. But there are learnable moments too. What a shame that the Committee on Doctrine let this one pass.
Here is Johnson's response to the Committee on Doctrine's latest missive:
It is with sadness that I read the October statement of the Committee on Doctrine about my book, Quest for the Living God: Mapping Frontiers of the Theology of God (Continuum, 2007). My disappointment focuses on three issues: process, content and result.First, process. In April the committee invited me to submit observations on their original statement (dated March 24, 2011), which had been composed without any discussion or foreknowledge on my part. My response was entitled Observations (printed in Origins 7/7/11). In it I posed important questions about the nature of faith, revelation, biblical language and theology itself, figuring that discussion on these fundamental matters might clarify the content of the book and where it had been misrepresented. Both publicly and privately I made clear my willingness to meet with Cardinal Wuerl and the committee to discuss these matters at any time.The committee did not engage these questions. No invitation was forthcoming to meet and discuss with the committee in person. Moreover, in its new document the committee addresses none of these issues not a single one. The opportunity to dialogue was bypassed. Despite the protocol Doctrinal Responsibilities (1989) approved by an overwhelming majority of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops after consultation with theHoly See, this committee for a second time has shown a lack of willingness to dialogue about such an important matter as the living God in whom we believe. It could have been so interesting and beneficial for the church.
Second, content. As a result of the lack of process, the October statement mainly reiterates the points made in the committees original statement. I appreciate that the new statement distinguishes between its criticism of the book and the intent of the author. It does correct some errors made in the committees original reading of my book, and the vituperative rhetoric has been toned down. Yet there is little movement in understanding.For example, pointing to Jesus parable of the woman searching for her lost coin (Lk 15:8-10) , my Observations ask: Is the church not allowed to use the language of Jesus, who casts God the Redeemer in this female image? While admitting the possibility, the October statement draws from this question the insinuation that calling God Father obscures the truth about God, something the book never says. It further criticizes Quest for not making the trinitarian language of Father, Son and Holy Spirit more central, noting how necessary this is in the formula of baptism. What is so baffling here is that Quest agrees with the validity of trinitarian language. It spends a whole chapter describing how this language came about, exploring its meaning, and affirming its use in liturgical ritual. True, Quest also points out that Scripture offers a multitude of other ways to speak of God, such as the above parable. For some reason, this is not acceptable.
Remaining with what is apparently a propositional notion of revelation and faith, the statement reaffirms its earlier judgment. But as Scripture itself demonstrates and my simple Observations try to make clear, there is so much more richness to the picture. The content of the statement disappoints insofar as it ignores the breadth and depth of Gods self-gift in history (revelation) and the peoples living response (faith).
Third, result. This statement, like the first, continues to misrepresent the genre of the book, and in key instances misinterprets what it says. It faults Quest for what it does not say, as if the book were a catechetical text aiming to present the full range of Christian doctrine. It takes sentences and, despite my written clarifications to the contrary, makes them conclude to positions that I have not taken and would never take. The committee's reading projects meanings, discovers insinuations and otherwise distorts the text so that in some instances I do not recognize the book I wrote. This October statement paints an incorrect picture of the fundamental line of thought the book develops.
I am responsible for what I have said and written, and stand open to correction if this contradicts the faith. But I am not willing to take responsibility for what Quest does not say and I do not think. To restate what I have maintained all along: The aim of this book is to explore many ways to think about the living God. Like the householder who brings out of the storeroom things new and old (Matt 13:52), theologians over the centuries have labored to seek understanding of faith that keeps pace with history. In that tradition, Quest for the Living God presents contemporary theologies from around the world which, listening to the belief and practice of people of the church, try to connect the truth of the living God with the thought forms and critical issues of our day. The books chapters clarify the new avenues of insight, rooted in Scripture: God as gracious mystery who is ever greater, ever nearer; the crucified God of compassion; the liberating God of life; God who acts womanish; who breaks chains of slavery; who accompanies the people in fiesta; the generous God of the religions; the Creator Spirit indwelling the evolving world; and Trinity, the living God of love.
I respectfully suggest that mapping these frontiers is a legitimate theological undertaking. Far from being contrary to the faith of the church, it is an exercise of that faith. I want to make it absolutely clear that nothing in this book dissents from the churchs faith about God revealed in Jesus Christ through the Spirit. The many new avenues of reflection signal, I think, the presence of the Spirit, alive and active, nourishing people in their hunger for God in our day. Of the thousands of messages I have received, one of the most poignant is from an elderly Catholic man who read it as part of a parish book club. The result? "Now I am no longer afraid to meet my Maker," he said, a stunning testimony to the nonviolent appeal of the truth of the theologies presented in Quest.
To conclude: This book affirms that the living God is the holy mystery of Love who cannot be comprehensively expressed or contained in any words, no matter how beautiful, sacred, official or true. There is always more to discover, in prayer and in service with and for the suffering world. It would have been a blessing if the Committee on Doctrine and I could have found common ground for dialogue on at least this point.I lament that this is not the case.
At this time I will make no further statements nor give any interviews.
About the Author
59 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
I offer some comments/analysis about the latest USCCB committee statement here: http://datinggod.org/2011/10/28/the-atrophy-of-theology-us-bishops-maint...
As some have tried to ignore the recent statement prepared by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace since it came "merely" from a Vatican office and not from the pope himself, I think that the same reasoning might be rightly applied here also.
Sadly, i think reasonable hope for dialogue exists in the field of theology, despirte say Ft.Hehir's recent comment that we need to return to the days of Benandin.I say to myself"what's the use?"
Weindady - appears that he doth protest too much?
Sister J. is never going to win this one, for the simple reason that the original criticism was broadcast far and wide before she was given a chance to reply. What the boys may have understood in a private meeting they will never be able to grasp in public, and hairs will be split and re-split if necessary because the power, the glory and the competence of the critics is now on the line. Should the line be breached, the gates of Hell will have prevailed. At least.
Fr. Horan's critique is well worth reading. Given my limited competence, let me just add that for the committee to say, concerning the "Evolution of Human Beings," that "the functioning of the brain cannot of itself explain human acts of knowing" is at the least tendentious. I too am convinced that reductivist scientific accounts fail fully to explain human acts of knowing or choosing, but it is factually false to say that their falsehood has already been "amply demonstrated by various philosophical arguments. To say such things does nothing for the committee's credibility.And poor St. Thomas, quoted so glibly about so many matters. Great as his thought unquestionably is, he would surely not countenance the "ipsedixit" way the committee has deployed it.
The state of smorgasbord Catholicism in the US was reaffirmed by the recently released "Catholics in America" study. Meanwhile, the USCCB Committee on Doctrine continues its publicized quest for an end, if not resolution, of the "Quest for the Living God" affair, increasing publicity and book sales at each step. A review of priorities seems warranted. http://ncronline.org/news/fifth-survey-catholics-america-released The bishops' comments in part suggest an unfortunately well-known type of book review: "This book is obviously unsatisfactory because it is not the book I would have written". It is telling that, in 4 years since the Quest was published, the bishops are apparently unable to point to an alternative which does properly what they call for and which should be a replacement text in the established niche Sr. Elizabeth's book fills. (Scholarly theological and philosophical tomes are of neither interest nor use to most of the faithful.) It might be fruitful for all if the bishops spent as much attention on what Johnson is doing right as on what they find her doing wrong.
I can hardly bring myself to read the bishops' committee's latest response. I don't know what I find most disheartening: their alarmingly misguided notions of how theology (or any text at all) should be read, their continuing shabby treatment of Sr. Johnson, or their basic inability to save even the tiniest bit of face in this matter. "We commend Sister's good intentions" is condescending, but they might have left it at that. Not willing to admit error? Fine, but there's no need to keep digging. I'm still bewildered by the committee's complaint that the book "does not adequately express the faith of the church." Isn't that what a catechism does? Why are they so determined not to give Johnson the benefit of the doubt (where any doubt is warranted, which is itself arguable)? They seem to have looked and looked for something in Johnson's book that actually contradicts or even muddles the faith of the church, and failed to find it. So they're left with nonsensical accusations like, if she doesn't explicitly explain and assent to whatever basic doctrinal point may be relevant, it is reasonable to presume she dissents. It's ridiculous.
I have been resisting the urge to buy the book until now, but the functioning of the brain cannot of itself explain human acts of knowing pushed me over the edge.
David N. - ? cc: USCCB Committee on Doctrine Subj: FYI
This is a naive question, but since when does theological thinking have to begin with the teachings of the Church? According to Aquinas and (I presume) his theological disciples, there is such a thing as natural theology which begins with non-revelation. Scotus also thought this was possible. I'm surprised that Sister agreed that she should start there too.
To err is human, even for magisterial gentlemen.To apologize, however, is not within the ability of ontological privilege.
Thanks, Grant, for your full and fair presentation. I commend all to my comments today on the bishops' action on Elizabeth Johnson's book in my comment and the crosslinks under the comment heading entitled, "BISHOPS WIN, EJ AND WE LOSE", accessible by clicking on at http://ncronline.org/news/theology/bishops-reaffirm-%E2%80%98quest-livin... .
I read Johnson's reply, but I missed the part where she said she reached out to the bishops to seek their counsel. Apparently, she just sat at home waiting for the phone to ring, and can't understand why she wasn't invited to the prom.
Mark, Are you aware of how sexist your comment appears?
"Sister J. is never going to win this one ..."It seems her publisher is the big winner. The bishops can't withdraw a book already printed, sold, read, and discussed widely.It also seems that the bishops have the potential to lose quite a bit: the respect of theologians in particular. Even if they had the power to silence their partners in theology, are they really prepared for a return to a century ago when American seminarians were little better educated in theology than your average high school student.
Grant--No. Can you explain why you feel that way?
An Archbishop assured me that theological controversy of this kind has nothing to do with orthodoxy and everything to do with shoring up clerical privilege.In the present case, a high school level of masculine pride can be detected. The tawdry and jejune notions of theological intelligence that the bishops think sufficient reeks of the locker room.
Mark, does Grant really need to explain?
Joseph--Yes, or you. It would be helpful. Honestly, though, I think it would be even more helpful to stick to the issue, rather than get mired down in personal attacks on fellow commenters. Why do you think Johnson did not seek out the counsel of the episcopacy at an earlier point in the process (if she ever did it at all)? Seems to me that would have been the obvious thing for a Catholic theologian to do. It could well be as an outsider to the way theology works, I'm missing the obvious. Could also be the opposite, though, it seems. For example, could it be that the Archbishop who "assured" you that controversy "of this kind" must be due to the base desire to protect clerical privilege, simply had an axe to grind? Or did he have relevant knowledge of the Johnson matter and offer specific reasons? By the way, I'm a bit puzzled why "reeks of the locker room" would not be a sexist comment, given what you consider sexist.
Mark,You just don't get it. Johnson, is not a child going to her daddy for advice. That is the relationship you have implied should exist between her and the bishops. Balderdash!
John--I suppose you're right: I do not get it. For example, I consider seeking counsel a sign of wisdom, humility, strength. I would never think of it as being childish or weak.
I think the two sides need to chalk this one up to agree-to-disagree. Or, perphaps, disagree-to-disagree.
You're right Mark, you don't get it.This isn't about dialogue or discussion. This is about being adversarial, it is about a constant "us vs. them" attitude toward the Church, about always looking for ways to be contentious, rather than seeking to work together.The very fact that certain bishops construed the book in a manner contrary to what Sister Elizabeth says she intended demonstrates by that very fact that her book, as currently written, is at best ambiguous and susceptible of being misconstrued and, hence, capable of misleading people. Rather than simply re-writing the text to remove any ambiguities and eliminate any possiblity that lay readers might misunderstand what she meant to say, she decided to pick a fight. Rather than seeing herself in common cause with the Church, she decided to see the bishops as her opponents.It is all so unnecessary.
Whaaaaaaaaa?!? The fact that a text can be misconstrued means that it needs to be rewritten? Isn't that kind of logic basically a formula for theology have all of the substance of a takeout menu?
Yes, Abe. We have an obligation, especially with respect to the faith, to avoid leading others into error.If what we say is susceptible of misinterpretation, it is incumbent upon us, not to rail against the reader for being so stupid and ignorant, but to clarify and reformulate our words so that they can be properly understood. That is a common editorial practice, as well as being a common peer-review practice.Authors have an obligation to present their material in a fashion that can be properly understood by the consumer (reader), and if it cannot be understood by all, if it is inherently ambiguous and susceptible of multiple interpretations, then the author cannot rightly complain when someone says to her, "this is ambiguous and confusing."
One of Sister Elizabeth's biggest complaints was that the bishops did not come to her first for explanations. Instead, they confined themselves to the text.Well, the common reader is not going to have access to Sister Elizabeth to ask her to explain to them exactly what she means. They are necessarily confined to the four corners of the page. As such, her book must stand or fall entirely on what she has written. And if what she has written is not clear, then it is upon her to make it clear, and not simply complain that the reader is twisting what she really meant.
Wasn't her complaint in the most recent statement that they did not actually respond to the questions and points of clarification that she posed for them when all of this originally started up?But perhaps you could give me some examples of theologians from the 20/21st centuries that successfully steer clear of the ambiguity and possible points for confusion in Johnson's work--just so I can see what you have in mind. Maybe Balthasar? I haven't really read him, but I hear that the Pope likes him. Is he a good example of clear and unambiguous theology?
Why does the "faith of the church" not deny "In hoc signo Vinces" which clearly talks about wars and chopping people's heads off. There was virtual silence when millions were toasted in incinerators citing that the silence was necessary not to bring more harm. What is more harmful than being burned alive? There were no statements by the UCCB when clergy were resent to abuse children. There really has never been a clear condemnation of the Crusades where chopping of heads was a planned act of intimidation. For that a person would be forgiven all their sins. For sure there will be no UCCB condemnation for the nun who was on EWTN last night saying that the number 33 was so magical that you instantly sprung people from purgatory on completion of 33 rosaries, prayer, pilgrimages, novenas and the like. What Mark, Bender and many others have to understand that the authority of bishops is centered in service. Jesus made this crystal clear with the Washing of the Feet telling all of us, especially those in authority, that they must serve first. The Holy Thursday Liturgy is the most hypocritical Liturgy of the year because the clergy ignore it completely, choosing domination over service. Make no mistake. This is what the statement of Elizabeth Johnson is. Men from the Empire are telling her, especially women, that the bishops tell us what the faith is while service is a token and non mandatory advice.
Did Hans Urs von Balthasar endeavor to work with the bishops, did he desire to be in communion with the Church, or did he view theologians and bishops as being in opposition to each other? Did he seek to set up a parallel magisterium, a pope unto himself, or did he willingly and happily submit to review of his works, especially if he was going to hold himself out to the public as a specifically "Catholic" theologian?Sister Elizabeth is entirely free to publish whatever she wants without the review of the bishops. But if she wants to write on Catholic theology, then as a matter of communion and truth, she must work with the successors of the Apostles and not in competition with them or against them. And if not that, then merely as a matter of Truth in Labeling under consumer protection principles.
A glance at www.amazon.com in the category: [ Books Religion & Spirituality Christianity Catholicism "theology" ]lists 8,100 results, including 9 by Prof. Elizabeth A. Johnson of Fordham. Other authors being bought in that category range from Saint Augustine to Joan Chittister. The particular focus and purpose of the USCCB Committee on Doctrine's efforts on Quest this year remain puzzling, given the variety of doctrinal issues readily identifiable among US Catholics that might warrant Committee attention -- Resurrection, Transubstantiation, sacraments, and extent of hierarchical authority on morals, for example. What is so special about this one woman?
Donald Wuerl himself submitted to the review process in seeking and obtaining an imprimatur and nihil obstat for his catechetical book "The Teaching of Christ."
If your fundamental view of the church is to identify it with hioerarchy , then you follow Mark and Bender;s approach.Little insight into paternalism and infantilization . The simplistic "a pop comment underscores the lack of insight.e unto himself"If protocol had been folowed originally (as discussed long ago) then maybe we wouldn't have this part of the srgument.What I think is germane though is that not long Cardinal Wuerl met with theologans to hype the new evangelization as Cathy reported in at hread here.He was the point man in the Bishops approach to this(with Weinandy as his spokesperson despite the reception of all this at CTSA).I think that speaks volumes about the disconnect between our bishops and many excellent theolgians , not just Sr, Johnson. I posit the continuing action as another (unfortunate and false0 step in the power control approach of policy makers.Of course if the hierachy is everything to you , you'll disagree.......
Have any other theologian in recent years been publicly critiqued by this Committee the way Sr. Johnson has been? Any male theologians?
Bender, don't be such a putz. I have no idea if Balthasar did/didn't do any of those things, but is your implication that Elizabeth Johnson has set up a parallel magisterium, where she is her own pope? Really? And, again, the point would not seem to be that Johnson doesn't want to work with the Bishops. I think it's fairly clear that she does want to work with them, but that she is frustrated with how they have gone about her work. Working with bishops doesn't mean rolling over for them. Or does it?
"the authority of bishops is centered in service. Jesus made this crystal clear with the Washing of the Feet telling all of us, especially those in authority, that they must serve first". Couldn't agree more."The Holy Thursday Liturgy is the most hypocritical Liturgy of the year because the clergy ignore it completely, choosing domination over service. Make no mistake. This is what the statement of Elizabeth Johnson is. Men from the Empire are telling her, especially women, that the bishops tell us what the faith is while service is a token and non mandatory advice."These are heavily worded conclusionary statements with no evidence provided for support. Don't stand with them, as they could fall and hurt you.
Irene - Yes. Salzman and Lawler won a prize and praise for their book "The Sexual Person". They also received a scathing 24-page rebuke from the USCCB Committee on Doctrine under then-Abp. Wuerl. The bishops declared in their conclusion: "The efforts of theologians, however, can only bear fruit if they are in fact carried on within a hermeneutic of continuity and in the framework provided by the Catholic theological tradition and the teaching of the Church." Immediately before that, the bishops wrote: "The issues treated in The Sexual Person are indeed vital matters for the life of the Church in our time. They should be thoroughly studied and discussed by theologians as part of their service to the Church and to society." Reconciling these adjacent statements is difficult. http://www.usccb.org/upload/doctrine-inadequacies-sexual-person-toward-r... A associated press release was put out, to which my original link now fails.
If hundreds of millions of lives were not impacted by the consequences of episcopal fiats, this would all be comical. You start with Jesus. Decades later unknown persons for little known reasons wrote down what someone thinks he said and whom people thought he was. The various reports sometimes conflict and are often ambiguous. What is clear is Jesus was unique and said unambiguously God loves us and we must love one another. That was new and basically all we really needed or need today to know. But some intellectuals for the next three centuries thought Jesus had to be dressed in a Greek philosophical suit, which was not an easy fit. In the early 4th century, Constantine, a ruthless pagan emperor and persecutor of Christians and many others, decided for presently unclear reasons, to commandeer the Church and convert it into a hierarchical, military style organization that is still with us. Being a military man, Constantine was intolerant of dissent and coercively compelled the bishops at Nicea prematurely to jam Jesus into Greek terminology This only led to unsatisfactory and endless trimming for centuries of the rough theological edges, only to end up with a "mystery" beyond our limited words to express. Poor Elizabeth Johnson tried to explore this "mystery' and has been burned at the virtual stake for her efforts. But this was not her real "sin". She has written well and often as a feminist Christian and that is her "mortal sin". Commonly, the Roman clique goes after a straw man (or woman) to make a brutal point about an author who writes well on forbidden topics. Women theologians surely see the inquisitorial signals here and will certainly get the message. The Roman clique are not fools. They could care little how many copies of the Quest books are sold. The are trying to depress her and other women's feminist theology books and they will likely succeed here. Hans Kung was nailed by Karol Wojtya, with the Judas-like support of Hans' long term ambitious "friend, Joseph Ratzinger, purportedly for Hans' later Christology, not his real "mortal sin" of challenging papal infallibility. Hans was not fooled and neither was anyone else. Google "infallibility' and you will find on this extremely important topic mainly either a few serious books written by Protestant scholars or apologies written by rising Catholic careerists . My college classmate , Joseph DiNoia O.P., a long time papal enforcer, was in DC recently to promote the new Roman imperial theology. What do you think he said to Messrs. Wuerl and Wienandy about Elizabeth's work and inquisitional treatment? You can continue now endlessly interpreting the entrails of the disgraceful and painful non-process Elizabeth has been subjected to or you could move on to how we might revere the modern "sack of Rome". Personally, seeing Elizabeth mistreated like this by bully bishops is painful. Her order, the Community of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood, Long Island, NY, taught me a lot for 8 years in the '50's about Christian charity and prophetic witness. She surely deserved better treatment and more respect for her life of dedicated and valuable service to the cause of promoting the Gospels.
Oops. "Reverse", not "revere" obviously in the next to last pararaph.
Question - thought that Sr. had repeatedly offered to meet with this committee? Appears that even after her offers, the committee continued to meet and ignored her requests. This statement does not address her specific replies to the initial USCCB committee findings. Why is there no effort to be consistent and fair?Now there is a statement that Wuerl offered to meet with her - in what capacity? Also, Wuerl has his own agenda and a record/pattern that is not very balanced or objective in these matters.There are also conflicting accounts about whether the 1989 agreement applies to this situation - as if it didn't? (that USCCB statement is an example of splitting hairs so fine you can't see it or figure out what it means).Why did it take the committee four+ years before weighing in on this book? Lots of unanswered questions. Would agree with other commentors - disagree to disagree.Shift things about - why are other groups (e.g. EWTN, Acton Institute, Ave Marie) allowed to air statements, shows, interviews, etc. claiming to be in the name of the church, and yet the USCCB and this committee do nothing? Any objective audit and investigation into frequent speakers, theologians, etc. on EWTN would arrive at much more glaring theological errors than the supposed errors in this book. Compare this committee finding to the papal backwards somersault to try to find a way to reconcile with SPPX which has members that continue to reject Vatican II. It is all very confusing.
The tasks of theology and theologians are many and multifaceted. Theology mediates between religion and a cultural matrix (cf. Lonergan) in one understanding of theology's task. Some see the aim of theology as the passing on of the wisdom and truth of the faith. These two tasks (and many other aims of theology) used to be understood in their relationality and complementarity by those who evaluated theologians and their work. Today, I am sad to conclude, the evaluators are just not as smart as those they evaluate.As many in the larger culture and some within the church devolve into dumbed down, simplistically "thinking" (I use the term loosely) reductionists, understanding of theology and all else must be shallow and minimalist (how else can one explain Bachman and Perry as candidates for the Presidency?). The increasing lack of intellectual depth and curiosity bodes ill for the intellectual future of the faith, politics and much else. Sr. Johnson's book is a very good book, elucidating much accepted theological thinking and developing deeper ways of appreciating the mystery we call God. Too bad some can't think on her level(s). So they denounce her work.
Thanks, Rick for those helpful observations. Notwithstanding my cranky comments, I am more hopeful, in part because of many sincere efforts of highly principled and very intelligent bloggers at dotCommonweal, ranging from the "hard of hearing wisdom" of savvy Anne Oliver, to the solid comments of Bill Mazella, Bob Nunz, Abe Rozenzweig , Rita Ferrone, and Jack Barry, to the often wonderfully bold (but true) comments of the youthful Lisa Fullam and Eric Bugyis. Of course there are many others as well. Sorry JSO, I will always pray for you, but I can't honestly give you many accolades, at least until we get a Buddhist related thread. Let's be honest; our Church is in crisis. But I am optimistic, if we work authentically, prophetically and respectfully, we will get through this well. It is not enough to say the Church always has, because an honest review of our history is truly upsetting. But here we are with an Internet invented not by Al Gore, but by the Spirit. Catholics, let's roll!
Rick Malloy,Read through this thread. As with a lot of threads on Commonweal and America, it lacks charity and civility. You are the people who are going to renew the church? Sarcasm, vitriol, snark, solipsism, bitternes -- these are fruit of the Holy Spirit?You talk of dumbing down? One of the commentators on this thread wrote a few weeks ago that the Gospels didn't talk much about sin -- in fact he claimed the word sin only appeared once in the Gospel of Mark. When I (charitably, I might say) pointed out multiple instances in just the first three chapters of Mark where sin is a thematically critical element, he replied that his search engine only returned results for "sin" not "sins" or "sinners". Search engine? You mean, you never read the Gospels? You never listened to liturgy of the Word? Millions of people are joining Pentecostal and Fundamentalist churches where Christ is unambiguously proclaimed. In Latin America, the number is in the tens of millions. Central and South America will have an evangelical protestant majority some day. I find that very painful and I pray that the Church goes through authentic renewal before this happens. But as I say, renewal will not come from Commonweal or America. You just can't get there from here.This is my last post in Commonweal. Too much dumbing down, too much shallowness and not enough charity.
Mr. Gibbons --If you check your last post carefully you'll find that it includes one accusation after another. Perhaps you think its brotherly correction. Then again, maybe Rick and the rest of us see our negative statements as brotherly correction.Wouldn't it be best to leave the judgments to the Lord as to who will or will not renew the Church?
"What is so special about this one woman?"Johnson chooses to work with the bishops. That is her problem. Joan Chittister's community backed her up completely and the bishops and Vatican backed up.
"Johnson chooses to work with the bishops. That is her problem."No, this is what makes Sr. Elizabeth the strong and wise woman as she is. She works within the system, and in the end, it seems that history, and truth, will vindicate her.
"Too much dumbing down, too much shallowness and not enough charity."Sounds like you are talking about the bishops.
The bishops' Committee has a responsibility ex officio and by intent to deliver a conclusive critique of the book in question. To be conclusive, i.e., to wrap it up, the critique requires accuracy in statements, rigor in logic and analysis, precision in definitions, and preemption of plausible objections at least equal to, if not superior to, that of the objects under examination. Their evident difficulty in spite of immediate access to resources in 9 dioceses and beyond should be cause for concern at a time when the US Church is in desperate need for clear, effective leadership. More is at stake than theology. The CEO of Ignatius Press Mark Brumley concludes his 10/28 blog statement on the proper relation between theologians and the USCCB Committee with " there are ample alternative theological resources people can draw on in their "quest for the living God". If you are unaware of them, I think we at Ignatius Press can manage to find some to recommend some to you." http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Blog/964/us_bishops_committee_respond...
Repetition is not the same as persuasion.Repetition is not the same as persuasion.See?
I read the St. Ignatius blog and then stopped at this sentence:"But even so, an important aid to that ministry (the U.S. Bishops' Committee on Doctrine), one representing theological expertise that goes far beyond Professor Johnson's theological chums in the guild, has found her work seriously deficient." Does he elucidate the argument? Does he make sense of the objections? No, it seems whatever it is, those kinds of things fall from sight, instead, it always comes down to whose presumed authority (i.e., title) gives one the prerogative to shut others up. This is the age of disintermediation. The bishops should be required to take a course.
Dear Mr. Gibbons,My point isn't to be sarcastic. It is to call attention to the fact that the evaluators of Sr. Johnson's book lose credibility when they judge her book deficient. They seem to think her book is bad theology because it is not the Catechism. I love the Catechism. It's a great book. To say the Catechism is not a good work of theology because it doesn't break new theological ground would be ridiculous. To judge Sr. Johnson's book deficient because it doesn't do what the catechism does is ridiculous. She wasn't offering the church another catechism. Her's is another kind of theological task.To judge Ryan Howard a bad baseball player because he doesn't strike anyone out is dumb. Ryan Howard is a home run hitter, not a pitcher. The catechism is a home run hitter. Sr. Johnson is a good pitcher. Both are needed to form a good team.
Could there be a more exemplary theologian, by the Bishops' own standards, than Johnson? She does not have an anti-authority attitude but wants to work constructively with the Church's pastors. The vast majority of theologians would have not patience with the episcopal demonstrations of authority and apparent tone-deafness to any theology since Athanasius.From the outside many people will see this as a bunch of men ganging up on a woman. Not a sexist perception, but a perception of sexism -- and potentially of scandal.
Thanks Grant for this detailed and informative post and thanks to all the commenters for an interesting thread. I haven't read Sr. Johnson's book (though now I'm intrigued!), so I won't comment on the theological, or the doctrinal, or the procedural issues raised by the Committee and by its method of proceeding.I will observe that---as she did with her statement earlier this year---Sr. Johnson provides a model for how faithful Catholics who find themselves in disagreement with bishops and/or priests. She chooses her words carefully and thoughtfully. She speaks with what seems to be the true humility of one who recognizes herself, as the old spiritual says, as "a child of God". She explicitly recognizes the role of the bishops in and for the Church. She's clear about when she's expressing her feelings and reactions, and equally clear about her thoughts and views---and very good about not conflating the two.I'm going to try to keep her example in mind next time I find myself in disagreement with a church leader.
My observations are going to be a bit different from other observations posted here thus far, so I will frame them as questions.Here are my questions:(1) What significant differences, if any, are there between the USCCB Committee on Doctrine's critique of Salzman and Lawler's book and their critique of Sister Johnson's book?(2) I noted that the NYTimes published a news story about the bishops' critique of Sister Johnson's book, in which the author of the news story mentioned that Sister Johnson is a feminist theologian. But did the NYTimes publish a news story about the bishops' critique of the book by Salzman and Lawler? If it did, I missed it. But if the NYTimes did not publish a news story about the bishops' critique of the book by Salzman and Lawler, why didn't it? Could it be the case that the NYTimes failed to publish a news story about the book by Salzman and Lawler because they are NOT feminist theologians? In other words, did the NYTimes publish a sensationalist story about a book by a feminist theologian because the NYTimes likes to publish sensationalist stories about feminists and critiques of feminists by an all-male group of Catholic bishops?
In the spirit of pro-and-con debate, let me raise some further questions regarding the USCCB Committee on Doctrine's critiques of Sister Johnson's book and of Salzman and Lawler's book.In terms of pro-and-con debate, what are the arguments that could be advanced AGAINST the practice of having Catholic theologians request and obtain an Imprimatur from their respective local bishops and having the local bishop's Imprimatur published on the reverse of the title page?As I understand the process of how a bishop grants an Imprimatur, the bishop delegates the reading and assessment of the book manuscript to somebody who has the expertise to read and assess works in theology.But how many Catholic theologians ever write an entire book without asking any other theologians to read chapters of the book or the entire manuscript?If this kind of reading is already a common practice among Catholic theologians, then what possible objections can there be to adding another expert reader to the loop?Next, I want to turn my attention to the practice of printing the Imprimatur on the reverse of the title page.In the spirit of pro-and-con debate, I want to advance an argument for this practice.The printed Imprimatur should serve to ward off and deter other bishops from filing complaints with the USCCB Committee on Doctrine.I hasten to add that the practice of having theologians obtain a bishop's Imprimatur for their books is probably not foolproof.
A short summary of the Salzman-Lawler story, apparently more complete than versions issued by various dioceses (see Google), is at:http://iglesiadescalza.blogspot.com/2010/09/riches-to-rags-sexual-person... The associated USCCB news release is identified at http://old.usccb.org/comm/archives/2010_09_arc.shtml but the embedded link to release goes astray.September 2010 News Release Bishops Doctrine Committee Says Book By Creighton University Professors Conflicts With Catholic Teaching On Sexuality (10-165) September 22, 2010
Thomas , your suggestion that bishops will have neutral theologians evaluate theological submissions for imprimaturs overlooks incontrovertible and extensive evidence to the contrary. The puppet bishops and their Roman puppet masters have an unmistakeable ideology that the want theologians to propagate. Your failure to acknowlege that is puzzingly.
I haven't read the book. But I read the bishops' statement. It seems some of their contentions would be easy to check. For example, the business with the sponge and whether Augustine said what Johnson said he did, or whether she misrepresented him. Has anyone who had read the book checked on this? If so, what did you find?I know the commenters here are 100% behind Johnson, unless they assume the bishops are always on the side of the angels. I have no problem believing that the bishops have condemned too soon or unnecessarily. But if the book contains gaffes of this order, it's not a very good book, is it? Anyone want to take up the specifics of the points the bishops raise, such as this one?


text:
Strategic Directions
UW Libraries 2011-2013 Strategy Map
Research and Scholarship
The Libraries saves time and increases productivity by providing fast, authoritative access to and delivery of global information resources. We play a critical role in advancing research, discovery, scholarship and medical care through creation, dissemination, transformation and exchange of new and existing knowledge. We partner with faculty and students to surface and make accessible the exceptional work accomplished at the University of Washington.
Teaching and Learning
The Libraries equips students with the skills needed to be successful researchers, scholars and informed citizens in a highly complex and information-rich world through our extensive and varied teaching activities. We are a leader and essential partner with faculty and instructors in the development and delivery of effective instructional services that integrate learning technology and information skills within University curricula, clinical services and other related programs.
The Libraries plays a unique role in the University and extended communities as a trusted, service-driven organization that transcends disciplinary and administrative boundaries. Our virtual and public spaces serve as a research, learning, and discovery commons designed to encourage inquiry, span subjects and formats, and provide authoritative resources and services when and where they're needed. We engage and transform communities and intellectual life by connecting people with knowledge and with each other. Our collaborations and leadership extend the University community regionally and globally.
The Libraries' expertise in the selection, management, use and sustainability of information resources plays an essential role in advancing the University of Washington as a great global university, now and in the future. As stewards of the scholarly record we develop and apply a suite of emerging technologies and effective services that contribute to the effective use and preservation of knowledge. We recognize that the unprecedented technological, demographic, and economic challenges we face demand transformational changes in the way library services are provided and institutionally funded. We will continue to establish strategic priorities based on ongoing assessment of user and institutional needs, use resources efficiently to provide excellent services and collections, measure the effectiveness of our efforts, and use those results for continuous improvement.


text:
7 Impractical Rock Star Fashions We Wish Had Caught On
Most fashion fads all start the same way: some musician wears something unusual on the stage or in a video, and millions of teenagers and college kids run out to buy it. This process has led all of us to wearing some laughably stupid shit over the years.
Which just makes it all the more frustrating to think back to all of the music fashions that should have caught on, but didn't because society apparently just wasn't ready. But oh how I wish it was socially acceptable to wear...
#7. The Bright Red Codpiece (Cameo)
If you were alive in the 80s and had working ears, you know who Cameo is. If not, then you may only know them as, "the band whose lead singer had a red shield on his dick."
Word up.
That piece of clothing right there is called a codpiece, and when you wear a codpiece, you are ready for fucking battle. It sends a message to your opponent that says, "I'm about to beat your ass, and there's not a goddamn thing you can do about it. But I'm protecting my stuff-n-things because after this is all over, I'm nailing your mom." Add in the fact that it's violence-and-rage red, and there is not a man on earth who will be able to maintain eye contact with you through a conversation. Or a woman, though for very different reasons.
What we do not understand is why, after Larry Blackmon hit airwaves with this fashion in 1986, this accessory didn't become as common as the necktie. By now it would have become so accepted that the freaking President would take the stage in one on inauguration day.
What Caught On Instead:
Tupac's exposed boxers/low hanging pants.
Though we should probably also blame a Marky Mark-era Mark Wahlberg for this one:
As an aggressive show of manhood or sexual virility, the low-hanging pants trend was just cowardly. It was for people who wanted to show their fuck gear but didn't have the balls to just not wear pants. And we've all seen these unbelievable douchebags out in public, pulling up their beltline with every second step to avoid the pants slipping down around their knees.
Our feelings on the matter are that the primary muscles involved in walking should be the legs. If the arms are doing just as much work, it's time to find a new fashion. Do ladies honestly get turned on by the sight of your junk hiding behind huge baggy striped boxer shorts? Especially when you could have your dick decked out in red armor like a brave crimson knight?
#6. Stuffed Animal Pants (Flea from the Red Hot Chili Peppers)
You saw Flea from the Red Hot Chili Peppers wearing these awesome pants in Young MC's Bust a Move video:.
You can't tell us those aren't comfortable. There has never been a product in the history of mankind that's fluffier than Flea's stuffed animal pants. We don't care what anybody says, nothing bad can come out of something fluffy that you can legally cuddle with your balls.
Sure, they're probably pretty warm in the summer, but tell us that you could honestly have a bad day when standing waist-deep in stuffed animals. Imagine getting mad at someone else while either of you are wearing stuffed animal pants. Imagine fighting a war, and trying to bring yourself to fire upon an enemy wearing stuffed animal pants.
What Caught On Instead:
Emo skinny pants with white belt combo.
We're not sure who did it first, but we're at least throwing a glance in Fallout Boy's direction. Skin tight, ball-crushing jeans, topped with a glaring white belt. Many teenagers in the 1970s had posters on their walls of women wearing this exact outfit. Pants so tight, you could see if they waxed their legs before the photo shoot.
You know that sound a vacuum packed jar of peanuts makes when you open it for the first time? We'd rather our pants not make that sound every time we unzip to take a piss.
#5. A Gold, Strap-on Beard (Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance" Video)
Forget the stupid shit Lada Gaga wears day to day. An unnamed dude in the background of the "Bad Romance" video (one of the guys participating in the Rape Auction about two minutes in) is wearing something that should have been become standard wear about, oh, 5,000 years ago:
Holy shit, that video has been watched 300 million times. And you know why? Because there is a guy in it with a golden strap-on beard.
This has all the makings of a generation-defining fashion, and has had more than enough time to surface in the public. Look at it. It has all the flash and shininess of jewelry with the girth and manliness of a beard. If you were a salesman pitching that product to our office staff, we could stop you right there and you would have sold a minimum of all of them.
But there's so much more. It's strap-on. At the end of the night, you could take it off (like we ever would) and soak it in gold beard cleaner. You can't do that with an ordinary beard. Have you ever been to a restaurant and noticed that the silverware was a little dirty? Those cheek guards easily double as soup spoons. Planning on starting a bar fight? Not only will the gold beard guarantee that you'll be in one, but it'll serve as impenetrable protection against any cheek and jaw shots.
What Caught On Instead:
Grills. Mouths full of gold teeth.
We're blaming this one on Nelly. Though it's been around for a while, he's the one who brought them into the mainstream and caused thousands of high school kids to look like mentally challenged UFC mascots. Yes, they're gold, and yes, they're removable, which on paper should be a plus. But look at them.
On the off chance that a woman gets bullied into going out with you, she has to either watch you awkwardly remove them and set them aside before dinner, saliva glistening off of your dashboard in the light of a drive-thru window... or witness half of your Big Mac clinging to them like crushed up cereal pieces on a Swiffer Vac pad.
#4. Devo Hats
Devo has been a band for 37 years, but the lead singer could knock on my front door right now and I wouldn't know him. Unless he was wearing that hat.
It's distinctive. And practical. Walking through a construction site? No problem. Need a jello mold? Just turn it over. Building a sand castle? Shaping a cake? Protecting yourself from the rain? Transplanting a geranium? These hats have you covered.
They're called "Energy Domes," and they were actually created by the band. The only thing that could make this hat more perfect is if when taking it off, your hair retained that shape. Shame on the public for not accepting these beautiful creations into their lives. Especially when you consider...
What Caught On Instead:
Bret Michaels' taco-shaped cowboy hat.
Only Bret Michaels could take something as annoying as a redneck cowboy hat and make it even more ridiculous. Sadly, that fashion trend swept through Hollywood...
That hat just spontaneously appeared there when Brett stood next to her.
...faster than a case of celebrity-spread chlamydia. Only more painful and a lot less attractive than the genital discharge. No one looks good in a cowboy hat except a cowboy. And they don't exist. Hell, in the catalogs where they sell the things, even the models look like douchebags in them:


text:
Item #
Special Offer:
Select Size
Select Width
Loading Recommendations
DetailsThough the Main Route collection could get by on looks alone, the performance features concealed beneath their rugged exteriors make them a solid investment. Hydro-Shield waterproofing substances are tanned into the full-grain leather upper, and special seam-sealants help keep feet extra dry in wet weather. The Kinetic Air Circulator is a shock absorbing underfoot cushioning with patented active-air circulating design, which helps keep feet cool and dry. To cap it off, the rubberized EVA outsole offers durability and shock-absorption to help reduce foot fatigue.
Northam is rated out of 5 by 8.
Rated 5 out of 5 by Matt1105 from Can't Say Enough! I've had a pair of these boots for a little over four years now. Although I own several other Rockport boots, I wear these daily during the cool seasons. They are also my go-to choice for travel. I've worn them in wet Irish weather, climbed a glacier in Iceland, and walked on the Great Wall of China among others. The Hydro-shield weatherproofing has managed the task every time. I am very sad to see these go! I've started stockpiling them.
Date published: 2013-12-15
Rated 5 out of 5 by big stoonod from Fantastic I had a pair of Rockport boots that I wore for years that were extremely comfortable. My dog chewed the back portion- so I ordered these on-line. The soft leather is fantastic. It took 2-3 wearings to break them in, but they are just as high quality as the last pair I had.
Date published: 2011-09-16
Rated 4 out of 5 by eow26yr from Overall good a pair of foot wear. The is a minor tear between the inner lining and upper leather. Since it is cosmetic only, don't want to go through the trouble of returning or excahanging. Have to agree with the general opinion that Rockport's quality has declined over the years.
Date published: 2014-12-16
Rated 4 out of 5 by Shayne from Good looking chuka boot. Good looking chuka boot. The weight is fairly light. I wore them for a few days and my Achilles' tendon hurt on my right foot. I am still breaking them in with different socks.
Date published: 2015-08-24
Rated 5 out of 5 by linda45 from die hard Rockport wearer My husband has been wearing Rockport waterproof boots since 2000 and will wear nothing else. Good quality, long-lasting. As he always says, "you get what you pay for.."
Date published: 2014-01-22
Rated 5 out of 5 by photoon from Great support and comfort! I found out that these boots have great support for knee. Also, very comfortable.
Date published: 2014-02-10
Rated 4 out of 5 by Wattsbone from Great shoe The shoe is a great feel and very durable thanks!!!!!!!!
Date published: 2013-11-15


text:
TEMPLE (November 20, 2012)--A retired south Texas couple has presented the Scott & White Healthcare Foundation $6 million which will be used for the new bone and joint institute.
Founder of Texas Regional Bancshares and its subsidiary Texas State Bank Glen E. Roney and his wife Rita K. Roney are retired and reside in McAllen.
The Scott & White Bone and Joint Institute is currently under construction in the vicinity of the hospital in Temple and will be named the Glen E. and Rita K. Roney Bone and Joint Institute.
"The $6 million gift will help Scott & White purchase leading-edge equipment for the new building, establish an endowed chair in the department of orthopaedics, and support the exciting research and education efforts in orthopaedics. $2.5 million of the gift will provide a dollar-for-dollar matching gift challenge for the ongoing bone and joint community campaign," a spokesperson said.
The new facility will be completed next September.


text:
adidas Team Speed Medium Duffle Bag
The adidas Team Speed Medium Duffle Bag is great for everyday use because it's not too bulky but it's not too small either. A large main component offers a Climaproof water resistant bottom and side panels so you don't have to worry about your stuff. A freshPAK ventilated end compartment helps keep your smelly things separate from everything else. A comfortable padded shoulder pad and handles make this duffle bag easy to carry.


text:
West Side StorySun, December 16, 2012 - 2:00 PMCobb Energy Performing Arts Centre in Atlanta, GA
We are sorry, the date for this event has already passed. This event took place on 12/16/2012. Click here to view upcoming events for West Side Story.
Still unsure? Check out our user reviews for:
Have a question? Need help? Call us at 800.477.5285


text:
05 February 2014
Two Shepherd Neame pubs based in Guildford have been honoured in the town's Best Bar None Awards, celebrating best practice among the licensed trade.The Britannia was crowned Best Pub, with the runner-up spot taken by The Star.
Read more
04 February 2014
The Rugby Tavern is traditional English pub so named because it was built around 1850 on land donated by the founder of Rugby School. Its central location, a short walk from the British Museum, London's theatre district and the Eurostar terminal at St Pancras, makes the Rugby Tavern a lively, bustling pub used by office workers, Bloomsbury residents and tourists.
01 February 2014
This is a lovely hearty soup with a spicy kick served with giant salt and pepper croutons.
29 January 2014
An innovative new cask ale collection, No.18 Yard Brewhouse, and a bold re-design for the established seasonal ale range are just a taste of what's in store from Britain's oldest brewer Shepherd Neame's 2014 cask ale calendar. The calendar offers a choice of 14 ales throughout the year, including celebration brews and the brewery's heritage ale brands - a beer for every month of the year and more!
28 January 2014
The Gate Inn is a complete one-off, a wonderful little gem, and one of Kent's best kept secrets. Fine cask ales served direct from the barrel in the traditional tap room, and hearty freshly made food at sensible prices, make The Gate the perfect pub for both for the friendly locals, and for 'real' pub fans from far and wide.
Contact us by email
Contact us by phone
Shepherd Neame LimitedThe Faversham Brewery17 Court StreetFavershamKent. ME13 7AXUnited Kingdom
Shepherd Neame is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority for consumer credit regulated activities.


text:
What linear algebraic quantities can be calculated precisely for a nonsingular matrix whose entries are only approximately known (say, entries in the matrix are all huge numbers, known up to an accuracy of plus or minus some small number)? Clearly not the determinant or the trace, but probably the signature, and maybe some sort of twisted signatures? What is a reference for this sort of stuff? (numerical linear algebra, my guess for the name of such a field, seems to mean something else).
SVD is stable, and in some sense incorporates all the stable data you can have, so the answer is: "anything you can see on the SVD". Specifically you can easily see the signature (assuming the matrix is far enough from being singular).
If an invariant of nonsingular matrices is locally constant (I guess this is what's meant by "can be calculated precisely"), then it can only depend on the connected component of the linear group, which means only the orientation (sign of the determinant) can be calculated. For symmetric matrices, the same argument shows that any calculable quantity is a function of the signature since any matrix can be connected to a standard representatives of one of the signature classes using a continuous version of orthogonalization.
The name "matrix analysis" seems to be associated with questions like this. This is an answer instead of a comment because I lack brownie points.