Sunday, March 10, 2019

All well. Many thanks to the mathematically-minded for their help with my Dathan hap. Goodness gracious me. It’s like that famous conundrum about a grain of rice on the top left-hand corner of a chessboard, to be doubled on every subsequent square: 2, 4, 8, 16 – and by the time you get to the 64th square, all of China couldn’t produce enough rice.

I haven’t fully addressed myself to the reasoning, but I will remember that the comments of 9 October are where the answers are to be found. I have knit happily on, and have now finished employing all the colours for the second time.

The rules say that all 15 colours of Millarochy are to be used. I have self-imposed a rule that each must be used once only as I go through the sequence. The general impression of the entire collection of 15 is on the gloomy side. I’ll try to take a picture of them all tomorrow when the light comes back. KD’s own Dathan looks fairly bright. Broad stripes of the three light shades, and strategic employment of the wonderful lime green, should do the trick. My own Dathan is fairly dark so far, although wonderful.

I now have more than 273 stitches. I have to count the wings every so often to make sure that there are equal numbers of stitches on each side. Today the answer was 134 (plus 5 in the central band). And I've done a few rows since the count.

I got out Mary Lou’s Pollywog pattern, thinking of the new great-grandchild. I wonder if I kept notes of how I did it last time? I certainly didn’t use the prescribed sport-weight yarn. Perhaps sock yarn, good for washing? And did I cast on the number of stitches required for one of the larger sizes, and then knit the measurements of the smallest one? Keep notes, is the moral.


I am glad to see the contact details for the Suffolk Vicar repeated in yesterday’s comments. His Lenten meditations are excellent; he has clearly worked hard on them, and thought hard. I will email him soon and thank him. I am hard put, however, to know how to address him. “Dear Mr Dotchin”?  “Dear Father Dotchen”?

I spent a summer, maybe two of them, in the early ‘50’s, working for the Asbury Park Press. One of the first things they taught me was that “Rev” by itself was not acceptable as a title. Clergymen were to be referred to as “The Rev. Mr….” That was 70 years ago. Things may have changed. And maybe the rule applied only in Asbury Park. But I still couldn’t bring myself to write “Dear Rev Dotchin”.


  1. How does he sign off his emails? That might give you a clue. Alternatively, look at the parish website, it may give you his title under "Contact Us". If it's a high Church (Anglo-catholic) parish, I'd go with "Dear Father". I work for the Anglican Church in Melbourne; it can be hard to get it right. Sometimes they prefer just their Christian name, so "Dear Tim" might be acceptable, too.

  2. But oh dear, he thinks socks are "the instrument of the devil":

    And I stand corrected that his first name is Andrew, don't know where I got Tim from in my last comment.

  3. I grew up in a high church in Peoria Illinois and we always used Father as the form of address. When my family moved to Michigan, the church we joined was not high. I was admonished publicly for saying father and that began my disillusionment with the Church. 60 plus years later it still echos.
    That said I am finding Rev Dotchin's meditations to be excellent and a good way to observe the Lenten season.
    I am also enjoying House of Brede.
    As an American, I might suggest Dear Andrew, but doubt I would have the courage to be so familiar with the learned man.

  4. I don't know about Health and safety, but he certainly has a serious fungal nail infection! I have given up wearing open toed sandals on aesthetic grounds after damaging my toe-nails once too often while hiking.

  5. They're excellent reflections, aren't they? Here in Ontario my Anglican (=CofE/Episcopalian) friends refer to, and address, their priest as "Father Doug", just as in my (Reform tradition) church they refer to our minister as "Rev Brian" but I believe the correct form of address for both is "Mr. ..." - in fact I checked an English CofE website to make sure, before I emailed him asking to be put on the list for the reflections. My church-lady mother was strict about this: in referring to a clergyman formally, or addressing an enveloped, it's "The Rev. Mr...." (or, nowadays, Ms.), and direct address is Mr./Ms. But I realize this kind of correctness can be regarded as a bit fuddy-duddy.

  6. Anonymous9:43 AM

    There is a best seller series in America about an Episcopalian priest called Father Tim. Don't know if he was High or not though. Chloe

  7. Ah the Mitford series by Jan Karon! They are wonderful! He's in a southern parish in the US south, probably middle;)!

  8. PS the House of Brede reflections are truly wonderful - a lot to think about this Lenten period and a thoughtful way to begin the day!

  9. I have read the Mitford series and I believe Fr. Tim may be low church.

  10. Our Vicar is formally addressed as The Rev. Ms. - she prefers to be called by her first name, but on documents, etc. it's that way. American Episcopalian...