From: Adam Funk on
On 2010-02-23, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:

> On Feb 23, 7:26 am, António Marques <antonio...(a)sapo.pt> wrote:
>> Yusuf B Gursey wrote (23-02-2010 11:17):

>> > also Monophysite Churches (Armenian Orthodox, Jacobite Syrian, Coptic)
>> > reject Dec. 25 as the date of Christmass.
>>
>> It's miaphysite!
>
> no, it's Monophysite (Mono, from one, Christ having only a divine
> nature).

AIUI, those churches (I think they are the Oriental Orthodox group)
have always considered themselves miaphysite, but other churches have
in the past called them monophysite.

Sometime relatively recently, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox
theologians got together and agreed that both groups believed
basically the same thing but had always been expressing it in
different terms.


--
I heard that Hans Christian Andersen lifted the title for "The Little
Mermaid" off a Red Lobster Menu. [Bucky Katt]
From: Adam Funk on
On 2010-02-22, R H Draney wrote:

>>> On 2010-02-22, R H Draney wrote:
>>>
>>>> In APL, indexing starts at one unless you've explicitly set it to zero by
>>>> setting the system variable quad-IO....r

> Actually, it means some funky character that I can't type here...it's drawn as a
> rectangle and pronounced "quad" by the APLinese....

Aha, found the chart:
http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2300.pdf

So I guess quad refers to the quadrilateral (ba-boom) over the L in
this diagram?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:APL-keybd2.svg


> (Comments are denoted by the "lamp" character, made by overstriking "jot" and
> "up-shoe")....r

As an emacs user, I'm not going to mock someone else's mnemnonics.

BTW, I've noticed that you can get 'aplus-fsf' packages for modern
GNU/Linux systems:

A+ is a powerful and efficient programming language. It is freely
available under the GNU General Public License. It embodies a rich
set of functions and operators, a modern graphical user interface
with many widgets and automatic synchronization of widgets and
variables, asynchronous execution of functions associated with
variables and events, dynamic loading of user compiled subroutines,
and many other features. Execution is by a rather efficient
interpreter. A+ was created at Morgan Stanley. Primarily used in a
computationally-intensive business environment, many critical
applications written in A+ have withstood the demands of real world
developers over many years. Written in an interpreted language, A+
applications tend to be portable.


--
Unix is a user-friendly operating system. It's just very choosy about
its friends.
From: Peter T. Daniels on
On Feb 23, 8:44 am, António Marques <antonio...(a)sapo.pt> wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote (23-02-2010 12:42):
> > On Feb 23, 7:04 am, Andrew Usher<k_over_hb...(a)yahoo.com>  wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> >>>>> "The Catholic Church" (which refers to no specific organization)
> >>>>> hasn't spoken for all of Christendom for nearly half a millennium.
>
> >>>> 'The Catholic Church' or simply 'The Church' refers to exactly one
> >>>> organisation. It's disingenuous to pretend otherwise. Also, it's been
> >>>> longer than half a millennium if one includes the East.
>
> >>> One doesn't "include the East." One has to wonder what knowledge you
> >>> have of the Eastern churches.
>
> >> The word 'Christendom', which you used, would normally be taken to
> >> include the Eastern Orthodox. One wonders why you wouldn't.
>
> > They are among the many churches for which the Roman Catholic Church
> > (which may have been what you meant by "the Catholic Church"?) does
> > not speak.
>
> It's just that that's what he was saying. That the CC "hasn't spoken for all
> of Christendom" for "longer than half a millennium".

That was I that said that. Count chevrons very carefully when deleting
attributions.

> You pretend not to know what "The Catholic Church" refers to, yet your
> answer is built on equating it with a certain church currently led by one
> Benedict XVI.-

It is Usher who said "'The Church' refers to exactly one
organisation" (complete with the quaint British spelling).
From: Peter T. Daniels on
On Feb 23, 1:48 pm, "Brian M. Scott" <b.sc...(a)csuohio.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:39:35 +0000, Ant nio Marques
> <antonio...(a)sapo.pt> wrote in
> <news:hm13st$kct$1(a)news.eternal-september.org> in
> sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Brian M. Scott wrote (23-02-2010 16:56):
> >> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:16:59 +0000, Ant nio Marques
> >> <antonio...(a)sapo.pt>  wrote in
> >> <news:hm0kgg$548$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>  in
> >> sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english:
> >>> Adam Funk wrote (23-02-2010 11:39):
> >>>> On 2010-02-23, Andrew Usher wrote:
> >>>>>>> The Catholic Church has stated, I believe more than
> >>>>>>> once (it's linked to somewhere in this thread) that
> >>>>>>> fixing Easter to a particular week would be
> >>>>>>> acceptable.
> >>>> ("Catholic" is a commonly used but imprecise abbreviation
> >>>> of "Roman Catholic".)
> >>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>>> "The Catholic Church" (which refers to no specific
> >>>>>> organization) hasn't spoken for all of Christendom for
> >>>>>> nearly half a millennium.
> >>>>> 'The Catholic Church' or simply 'The Church' refers to
> >>>>> exactly one organisation. It's disingenuous to pretend
> >>>>> otherwise. Also, it's been longer than half a
> >>>>> millennium if one includes the East.
> >>>> The "Roman Catholic Church", the "Old Catholic Church",
> >>>> and the "Polish National Catholic Church" are
> >>>> independent of each other.
> >>>> The "Eastern Catholic Churches" are under papal authority
> >>>> but I don't think they describe themselves as "Roman
> >>>> Catholic".
> >>> Gad, not again! You're trolling, aren't you?
> >>> "Roman Catholic" ISN'T AN OFFICIAL SELF-DESIGNATION.
> >>> ANYWHERE.
> >> It and RC are, however, widely used popular designations.
> > Indeed, but what relevance does that have when trying to
> > ascertain what the precise terminology is?
>
> It's not apparent that any particular notion of precise
> terminology is relevant to Peter's deliberate
> misunderstanding and the subsequent comments thereon.

_Now_ what are you accusing me of?

> >>> In the tradition from which the Roman and the Greek
> >>> Churches come, the Church has no splitting qualifiers.
> >> But this isn't really relevant outside that tradition.
> > But what is the relevance of the outside of that tradition
> > to what the ECC think of themselves?
>
> You seem to be involved in a different discussion.
>
> >>>  From the Church's point of view, there aren't multiple
> >>> churches.
> >> But from an external point of view there very obviously are.
> > It depends, but what is the relevance of any external
> > point of view to the  internal point of view which is
> > being discussed?
>
> You may be discussing an internal point of view; I am not,
> and it's not clear to me that others are doing so, either.
>
> [...]
>
> >>> but it *is* accurate to say that the ECC are 'non-Latin
> >>> CC', even if it's somewhat unwieldy.
> >> Which in a widely used popular terminology becomes 'Catholic
> >> but not Roman Catholic'.
> > In widely used popular terminologies spiders are insects,
> > Cycadaceae are palms and the moon is made of mozzarella.
>
> Not comparable.  'Catholic but not Roman Catholic' actually
> does identify the churches in question.

There is, for instance, a Ukrainian Catholic Church, with a cathedral
in Pittsburgh, and its observances (as at its large church in Chicago)
borrow a great deal from Orthodox practice.
From: Adam Funk on
On 2010-02-23, António Marques wrote:

>>>>> "Roman Catholic" ISN'T AN OFFICIAL SELF-DESIGNATION.
>>>>> ANYWHERE.

As I said earlier, it's what the churches print on their own signs in
the UK and (I think) in much of the USA.


> I disagree. If anything, 'Catholic but not Roman Catholic' might more easily
> refer to the old catholics or polish national catholics.

I certainly agree with you on that.


--
In the 1970s, people began receiving utility bills for
-£999,999,996.32 and it became harder to sustain the
myth of the infallible electronic brain. (Stob 2001)