Yes, it true! They are no good. It is bad very checker. They clear everything in this post blog. No green line squiggly. These sentence no verb.
Microsoft, it needs fix grammar checker or ditch. So articles say. I agree with it. I am violates multiple grammar rules herein. Last sentence two main verbs! Yet no squiggly line green still!
Microsoft Word grammar checker creation of Easter Bunny for mankind harm!
Bush is a microbrained insect who couldn’t care less about humanity and has a fondness for slime-molds.
It’s true!
The same goes for Cheney and Rumsfeld.
No! I haven’t been reading Daily Kos!
And I’m not talking about our nation’s esteemed leaders!
I’m talking about three new species of slime-mold beetles that have been named after our nation’s leaders.
And guess what: The gent who named them wasn’t trying to insult them but to honor them.
EXCERPT:
Wheeler, who is now head of entomology at the Natural History Museum in London, said that the choice to name beetles after President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was out of admiration for their principles, not because they look like the beetles.
I know others are more beatiful or moving, and I want to give them their due, but this picture has a special place in my heart. Used to have a postcard of it in my office at Catholic Answers for years (until we moved offices and it went missing).
Use this syntax to put your own favorite pictures of John Paul II in the combox:
<img src="http://xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx">
where the x’es represent the URL of the picture (make sure you don’t put http:// in twice).
It turns out that a neurologist hired by wife-killer Michael Schiavo to examine Terri, a doctor who approves of killing patients, had previously misdiagnosed a patient as being in a persistent vegetative state and declared that he would never again regain consciousness.
EXCERPTS:
”Sergeant Mack will never regain cognitive, sapient functioning,” Cranford said six months after Mack was shot while serving a search warrant on Dec. 13, 1979. ”He will never be aware of his condition nor resume any degree of meaningful voluntary conscious interaction with his family or friends.”
Based on Cranford’s unequivocal diagnosis of Mack, the officer’s relatives removed him from a respirator in August 1980 "because his family felt he should be allowed to die rather than exist in such a state," according to published reports.
But Mack did not die.
On Oct. 22, 1981, 18 months after Cranford declared Mack’s case hopeless, doctors at the advanced care facility where Mack was being treated noticed that he was awake.
(Cowboy hat tip to the reader who e-mailed!)
Canonist Edward Peters explains it all.
Last April, a year ago this month, I moved the blog to TypePad.
As of today, we’ve had half a million hits in the new TypePad location.
YEE-HAW!
These hits are page calls and include people going into the comboxes, but they do not include image or other file calls.
Our rate of hits has really picked up since those early days, and if things stay on track we should be at the million hit mark long before another year is up.
Thanks, everybody, for all your participation, which made this possible!
Being the inveterate royal-watcher I am, when I stumbled across a recap of Prince Charles’ wedding to Mrs. Andrew Parker Bowles on "BBC America" I watched … with clenched teeth and appropriately timed snorts of disbelief. Apparently even CNN couldn’t help but notice the supreme irony of the occasion:
"A solemn ceremony has blessed the wedding of the heir to the British throne Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles, now the Duchess of Cornwall, at which the couple each pledged to be faithful to each other.
[…]
"The blessing ceremony, which had the feel of a wedding and was aired across the globe, conjured memories of the 1981 day when millions of television viewers watched Prince Charles marry Lady Diana Spencer at St. Paul’s Cathedral in what has become part of royal lore as a ‘fairy-tale’ wedding. "That storybook Charles-Diana wedding ceremony, which captivated the world, contrasted in sad irony with what followed — a tempestuous marriage and separation of Charles and the now-late Diana, Princess of Wales, that shocked and appalled all of England and royal-watchers everywhere.
[…]
"The [Anglican] archbishop’s [Rowan Williams of Canterbury] talk of ‘love and faithfulness’ contrasted with the adultery the pair, as well as the late Diana herself, displayed over the years.
"In the wedding blessing, the couple recited a line of repentance from the Book of Common Prayer, the inclusion of which is seen as an acknowledgment of their prior adultery."
Or a continuing state of adultery, unless the new Duchess of Cornwall has obtained an annulment of her first marriage to the Roman Catholic Andrew Parker Bowles. (If she has, then this marriage to Prince Charles means that there would be no ongoing state of adultery and the marriage would be presumably sacramental.)
You may also be wondering what the oath is that the folks involved in the conclave have to swear.
Here ’tis:
I, N.N., promise and swear that, unless I should receive a special faculty given expressly by the newly-elected Pontiff or by his successors, I will observe absolute and perpetual secrecy with all who are not part of the College of Cardinal electors concerning all matters directly or indirectly related to the ballots cast and their scrutiny for the election of the Supreme Pontiff.
I likewise promise and swear to refrain from using any audio or video equipment capable of recording anything which takes place during the period of the election within Vatican City, and in particular anything which in any way, directly or indirectly, is related to the process of the election itself. I declare that I take this oath fully aware that an infraction thereof will make me subject to the spiritual and canonical penalties which the future Supreme Pontiff will see fit to adopt, in accordance with Canon 1399 of the Code of Canon Law.
So help me God and these Holy Gospels which I touch with my hand [UDG 48].
It seems to me that this oath leaves something to be desired in two respects:
A lot of folks have been wondering who precisely is involved in the upcoming conclave–apart from the cardinal electors themselves, that is.
Well, a good test of that is who will be required to swear the oath of secrecy concerning the conclave. The Vatican Information Service recently released a list of the folks who’ll be required to do that. Here ’tis:
So there you have it! Those are the folks who’ll be involved!
A lot of folks have been wondering who precisely is involved in the upcoming conclave–apart from the cardinal electors themselves, that is.
Well, a good test of that is who will be required to swear the oath of secrecy concerning the conclave. The Vatican Information Service recently released a list of the folks who’ll be required to do that. Here ’tis:
So there you have it! Those are the folks who’ll be involved!
