Apologies in advance if I offend someone's religious sensibilities. I speak as a lay person, but the topic at hand will lead me to venture into saying things I probably know nothing about.
The election of a new pope took place this past week amid much media ballyhoo. With the resignation/abdication of Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio met with the rest of the conclave in Vatican City on Tuesday (3/12) and emerged the next day as Pope Francis in honor of 13th Century's Saint Francis of Assisi. So far he seems to be developing a reputation as a humble man who pays his hotel bill himself instead of getting an assistant to do it.
Coincidentally, I had been seeing some monastic themes in my media consumption lately. One was the animated movie The Secret of Kells. The other was Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose. Having enjoyed the movie, I decided to read the book. The movie touches on it a bit, but the book more strongly emphasizes the historical divisions in the Catholic Church including factions of papal loyalists, Benedictine monks, and Franciscan monks. It seems strange to note that Francis and Benedict are now the names of the two most recent popes.
One interesting fact about the conclave that I never noticed until this one was the role of colored smoke as indication of how the conclave was going: black for discord, white for concord. So here's at least one place where I'm in over my head, but my understanding of what I read at Wikipedia is that a bishop is a full-fledged priest who has the power to ordain other priests and bishops. Bishops are often like governors or mayors of large cities in terms of their regional reach of authority. Some 80 bishops in the world are elevated to the level of cardinal who are like a cabinet of advisors to the pope and who have the power to elect the pope when necessary.
I have already gone over the end of my game in my previous post. My opponent is also my friend who has had the upper hand in our chess series (6-1 in his favor with no draws). I had spent most of my study time in the prior week on the Panov-Botvinnik Attack as it is a transpositional possibility. But he chose d4 and the King's Indian became our battleground. I had gone over a game between Kramnik and Nakamura, hoping that I could get some early strategic concession in the Bayonet Attack. But my opponent surprised me by playing the Petrosian Variation. 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 O-O 5.e4 d6 6.Be2 e5 7.d5
Up until this point, the game has been rather even. Fritz likes White here with an edge of about +=0.6 for White. Perhaps my ploy with Rb8 created enough doubt that the White attack was worth pursuing. Aside from that, I can't explain why my opponent began playing rather defensively, which played into my hands. His defensive moves seem suboptimal in that pieces went to squares that were less and less active. 25.Re1 h5 26.Bd3 This cuts off the defense of the third rank by the Ra3. But that is what happens when you're cramped. Your pieces trip over each other. 26...Bh6
other post. But note how my bishop was almost the hero of the whole game (39...Be3!) despite a slow start behind my pawn chain and how his bishop almost became the scapegoat (42...Rxh2+!) despite a fast start in the pinning variation.
The Subtlest of Differences
4 days ago