SOM SABADELL FLASHMOB

On the 130th anniversary of the founding of Banco Sabadell we wanted to pay homage to our city by means of the campaign "Som Sabadell" (We are Sabadell) . This is the flashmob that we arranged as a final culmination with the participation of 100 people from the Vallès Symphony Orchestra, the Lieder, Amics de l'Òpera and Coral Belles Arts choirs.

Beautiful!  Thanks to Ann V.

QUESTION OF THE DAY

CERN, via Associated Press

Proton collisions from the search for Higgs boson.

Now that you know it's probable that the God particle (Higgs boson) started it all, have you lost your faith?

FR JAKE BROKE HIS SILENCE

He's arrived at General Convention with his pup to sell his snake oil, which is "Good for Man & Beast".  Do pay a visit and read his post.

One of my fondest memories from GC2009 is a nice, long chat with Terry (aka Fr Jake) as we sat on the sofa in the lobby of the hotel.  Try as I might to call him by his true given name, I called him Jake the entire time.  "Terry" just didn't trip off the tongue.

JANE AUSTEN'S RING UP FOR AUCTION

What excitement! (Well, it is for me, as a true, blue, forever fan of dear Jane.) First the painting of the teenager that could be Jane Austen, and now the ring for which the provenance is much more certain.

A turquoise ring which once belonged to Jane Austen is up for auction at Sotheby's next week. But fans of the romantic novelist will need deep pockets if they are to win the rare piece of jewellery, which has a guide price of £20,000 to £30,000.

The turquoise and gold ring came to Sotheby's from Austen's family, complete with a note sent by Jane's sister-in-law, Eleanor Austen, in November 1863, to Jane's niece, Caroline Austen. "My dear Caroline," wrote Eleanor. "The enclosed ring once belonged to your Aunt Jane. It was given to me by your Aunt Cassandra as soon as she knew that I was engaged to your uncle. I bequeath it to you. God bless you!"

 Other pieces of jewelry belonging to Jane Austen are on display in Chawton Cottage, her final home until she was moved to Winchester to be nearer to her doctors preceding her death a few months thereafter.

In a display case in the drawing room, for example, is a delicate blue bead bracelet with a gold clasp, which belonged to Jane Austen. It somehow seems to symbolize the refinement of her turn of mind. She may have worn the bracelet to balls when she lived in the resort town of Bath - such as those Catherine Morland had the confused pleasure of attending in ''Northanger Abbey.'' In the same case is the topaz cross given to her by her brother Charles and an ivory-colored miniature similar to one that may have inspired the observation: ''The little bit (two inches wide) of Ivory on which I work with so fine a Brush, as produces little effect after much labor.''

How romantic it would be to think that the young Irishman, Tom Lefroy, with whom she flirted shamelessly, gave her the ring, but, since the box is from a London jeweler, it is much more likely that the ring was given to Jane by her brother Henry, who was a banker in London.  And would it be proper for a young man to whom she was not engaged to be married to give Jane a ring?

As I told Lapin, who sent me the link:

Exciting indeed.  I'd bid on the ring if I had the money to spare, but then what would I do with it?  Alas, my collections no longer interest me much any more as I draw closer to the end of life.  It has dawned that you really can't take them with you, and none of my children are interested, except for furniture and my few pieces of good jewelry, which are not antique collector's items.  

Should one quote oneself on one's blog?  Well, why not?

UPDATE: The beaded bracelet, which would have gone nicely with the ring.  I saw the bracelet when I visited the Chawton Cottage museum.

STORY OF THE DAY - REAL HERO

Anyone can slay a dragon, he told me, 
but try waking up every morning & 
loving the world all over again. That's 
what  takes a real hero. 

From StoryPeople. 

HOLD ON THERE, ERIC!

Last week, Romney's top campaign adviser said the federal penalty for refusing to get health coverage was exactly that -- a fine, not a tax. This week, Romney said it is a tax because the Supreme Court opinion he opposes declared it a tax.

Confused? So is the Romney campaign, apparently.

The back-and-forth shows the tightrope Romney must walk on the health care reform issue now that he is the certain Republican presidential nominee.

There you have it.  Romney disagrees with his chief adviser, Eric Fehrnstrom, (and himself!) about whether the ACA mandate is a tax or a penalty.  One has to be sympathetic to the poor adviser as he makes his way through the thicket of mind-changes by Mitt.  How's a fellow to keep up?

The Wall Street Journal scolded Mitt, and he quickly stepped away from his adviser's characterization of the mandate as a penalty or a fine.  So then, the anti-tax Romney imposed a tax on the people of Massachusetts when he was governor and signed the health care bill into law?

IT IS ALL RIGHT

Bro John Anthony

Faith gives us the power to see life very clearly, to admit that sometimes it seems all wrong and still to know that, somehow, it is all right.

–Br. David Vryhof
Society of Saint John the Evangelist

St Cuthbert's Cottage

LITTLE KNOWN QUOTES FROM THE FOUNDING FATHERS

Check out David Atkins at Hullabaloo. Here's one:

James Madison:

There is an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by … corporations. The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses."

There's more, much more at the link. Someone tell the Supremes!

HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY!

Just to show that I really am patriotic, here's a video of the U S Marine Band playing John Philip Sousa's "The Liberty Bell".  My father was fond of Sousa's marches,  so we grew up listening to them on the old wind-up Victrola and marching around the room in time to the music.



H/T to Counterlight, who reminded me of Sousa's marches.

Holiday card from someecards.com  

DAVID CHILLINGWORTH, PRIMUS OF THE SEC ON THE ANGICAN COVENANT

Bishop David Chillingworth: "You may have seen the article which I provided for the Church Times following the decision of our General Synod not to adopt the Anglican Covenant. Just in case you missed it, here it is."

At our recent General Synod, the Scottish Episcopal Church, decided by a clear majority not to adopt the Anglican Covenant. In 2011, Synod had discussed the Covenant in Indaba session. It was clear then that a decision to adopt was unlikely.

We tried hard to keep the issue open.  I believe that the Anglican Covenant is an honourable attempt to heal our brokenness. But some time ago, as I set out to address yet another meeting in my diocese, I confided to my blog that I was going to listen to the most committed Anglicans on the planet telling me why they didn’t like the Anglican Covenant. Put simply, they believed that the Covenant is un-Anglican.

The Scottish Episcopal Church holds tenaciously to its commitment to the Anglican Communion. I see three reasons for that.

First, it's our size - to a small church, it matters that we belong to something bigger. Then there is a reason which is proprietorial and slightly presumptuous - we invoke the memory of Samuel Seabury, consecrated in 1784 by the Scottish bishops as the first bishop of the church in the United States of America. We like to believe that we were in at the beginning. We want to be part of the bringing to birth of a new phase of Communion life. Finally and more subtly, our particular attitude to authority - rooted in the collegiality of a College of Bishops - finds an echo in the Anglican Communion' aspiration to dispersed rather than centralised authority.

We approached this decision with great care and with some apprehension. We too are a diverse church. We have congregations who see the Anglican Covenant as important and necessary for their security within our church.  This decision has called on our reserves of internal trust. Those congregations needed to know that, whether or not we adopted the Covenant, we intend to take a measured and respectful approach to our diversity. But therein lies the first of the problems. The Covenant addresses what it sees primarily as inter-provincial disagreement. But its effect may actually be to heighten intra-provincial tensions.

Provinces will continue to consider the Covenant and come to their own decisions. The Anglican Communion will continue to seek unity in an astonishing diversity of culture and context across the world. It already has structures and processes through which we build communion life. There are the four Instruments of Communion. There are networks - family, environment and others. There is the Anglican Alliance.  There is Continuing Indaba - for which I serve as Chair of the Reference Group. There are Diocesan Companionship Links.

But we need a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges. We also need to recognise that no single measure can address them all.

The genesis of the Anglican Covenant lay in the Windsor Report - which arose from the development of conflict around issues of human sexuality. In my experience, conflict is almost never 'single issue'. It is a complex of issues which sometimes don't quite match in a directly adversarial way. And the passion with which those conflicts are experienced tells us that other issues are in play. It's about more than the 'presenting question'. Let me suggest two other issues which are part of this.

The first is one to which we are tangentially linked through the Seabury story - it is the legacy of history. The sharp word is colonialism. People assert independence of thought and action more strongly - challenge authority more resolutely - when relationships are shaped and conditioned by the legacy of history. In the Anglican Communion, that history affects interactions between the New World and the old world and between the developed and the developing world. The challenge is to build an Anglican Communion which transcends its history - a post-colonial Communion.

At the Primates Meeting in Dublin last year, I learnt that another of the great diversities of Communion life is in our understanding of authority. A bishop in the Church of England does not exercise authority as we do in Scotland - different again in America and in Nigeria and in Hong Kong. That diversity enriches but it has led to misunderstanding and disappointment in one another.

I believe that a new understanding of the problems we face is needed. By challenging the legacy of history, new axes of relationship will be encouraged. We shall be better able to address the deeply adversarial divisions which gather around the human sexuality issues. Communion grows when we share together in mission, grow together as disciples and act with a self-discipline which is the foundation of unity in diversity.

Our Communion is a gift to the world - a global institution which aspires to exist largely without centralised authority and to celebrate its rich diversity. Such a Communion models things which are important for the world community. Such a Communion is attractive in mission because it has learned to transcend conflict. I believe that we now have a historic opportunity to reshape the Anglican Communion so that it may become an instrument of God's mission to the world in the next generation.

As General Convention of the Episcopal Church begins, and the Anglican Covenant is on the agenda, I thought Bishop David's article was worth posting in its entirety. My hope is that we join the Scottish Episcopal Church, the dioceses in the Church of England, and the House of Bishops in the Anglican Church in the Philippines to vote a firm "no" to adoption of the Anglican Covenant.