Sentences with phrase «on teaching responsibilities»

As the leading practitioner of Tripsichore style yoga she has taken on teaching responsibilities in the uk, uSA, the Far east, Mexico and Europe.

And these adverse effects are becoming more and more of a problem, given that more and more CRS are taking on teaching responsibilities to plug the gaps left by academics who have been diverted into administrative and management tasks.

Not exact matches

... while Paul VI did write that it was his responsibility to sift the material he had been given by many advisers, including the papal commission on marriage and fertility that Pope John XXIII had established and that he, Paul, had expanded, he also made clear that the teaching of Humanae Vitae rested, not on the personal conscience of Giovanni Battista Montini, but on the mature conviction of Pope Paul VI as custodian and servant, not master, of the Catholic tradition.

I also thought the statement on the Iraq War, issued by outgoing president Bishop William Skylstad and approved by the conference, was a thoughtful teaching exercise in which, as I put it on the First Things website, the bishops «neither exceed their competence nor shirk their responsibility.»

In a manner familiar by now, they construe the teaching on conscience as a «conscience clause» exempting them from moral responsibility.

Yet, when all this is said, present - day Christians must bear in mind that the weight of Jesus» teachings is on the dangers of possessions and the responsibility of sharing.

But for others who had families and social responsibilities that they could not or would not abandon, the teaching on wealth changed.

You can hold that a woman is so made that she enters into her sexual identity and so finds a particular fulfillment by giving cooperative support to a male leader, or that she is not; you can hold that a man is so made that he enters into his sexual identity and so finds a particular fulfillment by taking responsibility for a female helper, or that he is not; and you can argue across the board for whichever view of Bible teaching on role relationships fits in with your idea.

On the other hand, when teachers possess the authority of qualified experts in learning and in the guidance of learning, and when they are organized into strong professional bodies which faithfully exercise responsibility for high professional standards, they can freely teach with sole regard to individual aptitude and need and without fear or favor in respect to social class.

I should further state that all of the moral teachings of the Qur «an are based on the notion of moral responsibility, which entails the freedom of choice.

Nonetheless, one may be permitted to wonder whether such factors should have much bearing on the responsibility of bishops to articulate clearly the Church's teaching and the pastoral tasks entailed by that teaching.

All of us who care about peacemaking and alternatives to a nuclear holocaust — those of us who still believe that God loves the world God created and expects us to do all we can to preserve and enhance life on earth — have a responsibility to pay attention not only to what these preachers are saying but also to what our own tradition teaches about «the last things.

They said they have made «a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today,» that their faith is very important in their life today; believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they have confessed their sins and accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior; strongly believe they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; firmly believe that Satan exists; strongly believe that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; strong agree that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; strong assert that the Bible is accurate in all the principles it teaches; and describe God as the all - knowing, all - powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today.

They had been at least minor movers and shakers in their communities, people who felt some responsibility for what went on around them largely because of a match between the moral teachings they grew up on in church and the possibilities inherent in their middle - class social roles.

They thought the truth of the Church's teaching about conjugal morality and fertility regulation could be presented in a humane and personalistic way: one that acknowledged both the moral duty to plan one's family and the demands of self - sacrifice in conjugal life; one that affirmed methods of fertility - regulation that respected the body's dignity and its built - in moral «grammar;» one that that recognized the moral equality and equal moral responsibility of men and women, rather than leaving the entire burden of fertility - regulation on the wife.

If one turns to sex education, the Church does not officially and substantially teach anything different from what it taught before the Council: that any information on that subject is virtually entirely the responsibility of the parents at the secondary age.

On Immigration In an interview with Zenit, Bishop Gerald Barnes, who heads the U.S. bishops» Committee on Refugees and Migrants, observes that Catholic social teaching affirms the principle that «sovereign nations have the right, in fact the responsibility, to control their borders»On Immigration In an interview with Zenit, Bishop Gerald Barnes, who heads the U.S. bishops» Committee on Refugees and Migrants, observes that Catholic social teaching affirms the principle that «sovereign nations have the right, in fact the responsibility, to control their borders»on Refugees and Migrants, observes that Catholic social teaching affirms the principle that «sovereign nations have the right, in fact the responsibility, to control their borders».

Relying on «twenty centuries» of Catholic doctrine and tradition, the council's responsibility was to give pastoral teaching that would enable the Church of «our age» to distinguish what was good in the modern world from what was indifferent, or worse, and to make right use of the good while firmly rejecting the bad.

They these priest had a responsibility to all the nations, to all the people on the earth as taught in Isaiah 56, and this they did not do as taught to us in Malachi 2, of the Levites then, and unbelievably they are here now.

He saw that «new occasions» not only «teach new duties» but that they also «make ancient good uncouth» and that our responsibility, granted the relativism that attaches to all our experience and our statement, is to think afresh, on the basis of the general apostolic witness and with due regard for earlier Christian teaching, as well as in the light of our own experience of «newness of life,» so that what we have to say is nove (newly said) and often is also nove (the saying of new things).

They attend to scripture; struggle to discern the gospel's call and demand on them and their congregations in particular contexts; lead worship, preach and teach; respond to requests for help of all kinds from myriad people in need; live with children, youth and adults through life cycles marked by both great joy and profound sadness; and take responsibility for the unending work of running an organization with buildings, budgets, and public relations and personnel issues.

I mean, according to Scripture, it is the parent's responsibility to raise up their children and teach them about God, but our modern way of doing church relinquishes these things to 45 minutes on Sunday morning and Wednesday night, in a building with a (generally) controlled environment, and to a person we don't really know.

Contrary to the Augustinian teaching on original sin, and human nature, they emphasized human freedom and the responsibilities and obligations of Christian faith.

The lay leader drew up a summary, deprecatory statement: «I hear us saying we are a community of individuals who profess a belief in Christ, who have a limited or nominal belief in his teachings and the extension of his work, and who pose very limited responsibilities on becoming part of our group.»

The student of Aquinas already familiar with his teachings on individual personal responsibility, conscience, and the role of reason and will in free choice is likely to be surprised by his unremitting hostility to heretics.

Even for the Catholic the road from the general principles of Christian ethics to concrete decision has become considerably longer than formerly, even when he is determined unconditionally to respect all those principles, and for a good part of the way, in the last decisive stages of the formation of the concrete moral imperative, he is therefore inevitably left by the Church's teaching and pastoral authority more than formerly to his own conscience, to form the concrete decision independently on his own responsibility.

was a deliberate attack on the limited range of moral responsibility popularly taught in Jesus» time.

Egalitarianism (also known as «mutuality»): Christians who identify as egalitarian usually believe that Christian women enjoy equal status and responsibility with men in the home, church, and society, and that teaching and leading God's people should be based on giftedness rather than gender.

But on a more profound level as it bears the responsibility of maintaining a tradition of loyalty to the truth handed down by Christ to teach all nations.

Yes... if taught the biblical ideal about using «measure» on themself (as it is presented)-- and what responsibility truly means (or as the church calls it — repentance).

I don't think it's so much about the levites being paid for their service it's about us doing what's right toward Pastors that must feed and tend to the flock of GOD if GOD has called them.JESUS even said in luke 10:7 that the laborers are worthy of their wages.In luke 8 1 - 4 it's says even JESUS HIMSELF recieved financial support from the women who ministered to him with their possessions.Now most people today would say he should have been ashamed of taking money from those poor women but JESUS accepted their support and they was blessed for sowing onto the LORD»S work.1 Corinthains 9:1 - 15 says dint muzzle the ox while it tread out the grain was GOD talking about oxes no he was talking about those who labor in the ministry.Who goes to war at their own expense.Or who goes to war but pay for their clothes, guns, etc.No one because the goverment if that country provide these things because of the soilders service.Who plants a vineyard and don't eat from it.Who tends a flock and don't drink the milk of it.I think it's just spiritual sense to support a pastor that's teaching you the word, casting out devils, laying hands and healing is manifesting in people lived, going to hospitails, prisons, and house calls to pray for the sick and shut in, going to graduations and funnerals, praying and fasting for himself and the flock.I think a person who think a pastor shouldn't be paid for their service either don't know they need to be paid and need to be taught or they are demonic in their thinking and either hate GOD, PASTORS, AND GOD»S PEOPLE.Why do nt you hear people saying anything against the dope dealers, strip clubs, dope houses, liquor stores, etc.It's only when people give into the LORD»S work that evil minded or misinformed people have a problem with it.No sir we don't have to use the old testament to show that we should support out pastors.You don't use the law, love tells me to support the pastor.Under the new testament LOVE is the greatest of all.Love for GOD and man.If GOD asked for 10 percent under the law to support the levites who didn't have all the responsibilities of Pastor today.Church rent, gas for vans of thd church, insurance fir the church and church vehicles, feeding and clothing the poor, light, gas, and water bill, mantience on the church or vehicles, not to mention the Pastor own house, cars, children, insurance, etc.If would be foolish for one to think that a pastor should take care if his house and GODS HOUSE without people supporting the work of the KINGDOM OF GOD.If we love GOD we are going to support HIS KINGDOM and HIS PASTOR.If under the law GOD asked for 10 percent how much should we give under the LOVE COVENANT?Example I love my wife and if I had 300 dollars I would surley give her more that 10 percent which would be 30 dollars because I love her.The law says you must give LOVE says I chose to give because I love GOD and man.Again we don't have to use the law just love and spiritual sense because hate and a carnal senses will not understand.Now I have given you scriptures please do the same when you respond not your opinion.Please respond right away I await your answer.GOD BLESS.

And other texts: Letter of Consolation to all who Suffer Persecution (1522), Temporal Authority: to what extent it should be obeyed (1523), covering a wide range of the responsibilities of the state, Ordinance of a Common Chest (1523), That Jesus Christ was born a Jew (1523), a defence of the teaching that Jesus was the promised «Messiah» of the Jews, To all Christians in Worms (1523), Concerning the Ministry (1523), Trade and Usuary (1524), stricter than some earlier medieval theories but not in practice greatly different (and he sent a letter to the Saxon Chancellor, Gregory Bruck on the same topic), To the Councillors of all Cities in Germany that they establish and maintain Christian Schools (1525), How God rescued an Honourable Nun (1524), the story of an escape from a convent, A Christian Letter of Consolation to the People of Miltenberg (1524).

Virtually every Christian public ethic that justifies behavior that runs counter to the example and teaching of Jesus does it on the grounds of «responsibility.»

As Christians, it is our responsibility to bear witness to the truth about marriage as taught by both revelation and reason — by the Holy Scriptures and by the truths inscribed on the human heart.

He made national news in 2006 when he blamed Ted Haggard's affair with a male escort on Haggard's wife for «letting herself go» and has often repeated the teaching that women who fail to please their husbands sexually (by providing regular oral sex and maintaining their attractiveness) bear some responsibility for their husbands» infidelity.

The CDF called on theologians to function «in communion with the Magisterium, which has been charged with the responsibility of preserving the deposit of faith» (6), and to offer the People of God «a teaching which in no way does harm to the doctrine of the faith» (11).

The 2011 recipient was Karen Schmidt, a professor in the Department of Animal Sciences and Industry at Kansas State University, Schmidt's teaching responsibilities include Fundamentals of Milk Processing, Food Product Evaluation, Dairy Foods Processing and Technology and Quality Assurance of Food Products, and her research program focuses on processing and quality of dairy and non-dairy foods.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

Any effort on the part of parents to teach environmental responsibility to their children can therefore be considered strictly remedial; the best thing they could have done for Mother Earth would have been not to add another human to her burden in the first place.

I tend to favor the middle ground: it's your responsibility to set limits, check up on your kids occasionally (the amount you will do this depends on their behavior), hold them accountable when it's needed, and teach them how to make good choices even in tough social situations.

Character Education: The Missouri Violence Prevention Curriculum Framework (2008) recommends that character education be taught in schools; especially focusing on responsibility and respect.

Do we bury it (eternally mummified in plastic and gel goo), teach them to ignore their instincts, train our kids to poo and pee on themselves and pretend it isn't there, give them the huge responsibility to train themselves out of something we've trained them into?

There are many benefits to parents and kids talking about body safety, but when we teach children body - safety rules without screening caregivers, we put the responsibility for safety on children and we rest on a false sense of security.

The key is to meet the problem head - on and focus on solutions that will resolve the issue in the long term, which includes teaching your child how to be a better problem - solver with a healthier outlook on their responsibilities.

Mom of 3 and author of «Hard Core Poor» shares some simple tips on how to teach children about money, management and financial responsibility.

Do yourself a favor - help teach your kids a little responsibility with this free bedtime checklist printable and they'll be on their way to getting themselves ready for bed!

Much to our misfortune, there is not a single school (that I am aware of) in the whole of the United States or elsewhere that has taken on the responsibility of teaching young adults about the principles of conscious procreation and parenting.

Furthermore, due to the fact that permissive parents don't teach their children the importance of responsibility, these children are often experiencing problems when they have to be on their own.

Understand that I am not telling you to ignore your urgent responsibilities, just make sure you keep a healthy priority on your family, teaching your kids, and nurturing your marriage.

Hop on over to check out my brutally honest post about the guardian angel who entered my life when I was a pathetically miserable «victim» of my circumstance and taught me a simple, yet infinitely valuable lesson that changed my life — to take responsibility.