bearing blog

Easy as apple pie.

In other news, Mary Jane and I baked an apple pie together yesterday for the first time. 

 I recently took a cue from Hannah, who decided to make a good toaster oven a centerpiece in her kitchen.  Do you know, cooking with small children gets a lot easier and, I think, safer when you put a toaster oven down at their level? 

It sounds a little bit counterintuitive, but hear me out.  Stovetop cooking is really, really tough for a little one.  You can put them on a stool or something like the Learning Tower and stand right by them, and indeed I do that with my little ones, helping them stir things while they learn about Safety With Hot Things.  But look, you're up on a stool (meaning falling is a real possibility), there's actual flames inches from your kids' clothes, and the surfaces are extremely hot.  I advocate cooking with children, so they can learn safety and competency from a young age.  But there is no denying that stovetop cooking with small children requires great care and attention.

Baking things in the oven, say, a casserole, is not so bad.  Casseroles are great things for medium-sized kids to make when they are old enough to be put in charge of dinner once in a while.  Everything goes in a pan and the pan goes in the oven.  Cheese and onion enchiladas are Oscar's favorite dinner to make, there's no raw meat to handle and no browning, just layering and baking.  Recently he's learned to make buttermilk biscuits and egg bake, too.  But the oven door is so big!  It's tough for a kid to put anything in the oven, it's tough for a kid to take anything out of the oven, it's really tough for a kid to stick a toothpick in to see if it's done.  Whenever Oscar's doing that, I'm torn between calling out "Be careful!  Remember the door is really hot!" and "Hurry up, check it and close the door!  All the hot air is getting out!"

This is where the toaster oven is so great.  The most important thing is that it be stable so it can't be knocked down.  But if you place it on a low table so there's no getting on and off a stool to mess with, and have enough low-table space next to it to set a hot pan, a three- or four-year old can be taught how to put things into the oven, how to set up a trivet so there's a place for the hot pan to go, how to wear hot mitts, and how to take the pan out of the oven.  Really.  I mean, you have to know your own child, and you have to know how much supervision is necessary, but believe me, the toaster oven is far superior to either the stovetop or the regular oven here.  And yes, there is a possibility of them burning themselves, but I think the likelihood of minor burns (Teachable Moment Burns, we call them around here) may be higher, the likelihood of catastrophic burns is much lower than either with the stovetop or the regular oven.  At my house, we like our teachable moments to come without skin grafts.

So, I followed Hannah's lead and I got a few pans sized for my (pretty small) toaster oven:  an 8-inch cake pan, a set of mini loaf pans, an 8-inch fluted tart pan (the kind with the bottom that pops out), a "broil and roast" pan (a rack inside a little roasting pan), and a cookie sheet.  I can also fit a regular-sized loaf pan and a 9x9 Pyrex dish in there.  What I haven't found yet is a 6-cup muffin tin -- I bought one, but the handles turned out to be just big enough to prevent its fitting in my toaster oven.  Damn!  I gave it to Hannah, whose toaster oven is bigger.

I've been experimenting a little bit with preparing food in the toaster oven, and collecting recipes for the children to follow.  Meatballs baked in spaghetti sauce are very do-able, even for the smallest.  Oscar successfully made chili cheese egg bake a couple of weeks ago.  Two nights ago Mary Jane cooked the hot dogs in the broil 'n' roast pan, all by herself.  And last night, like I said, M.J. and I made our first apple pie.  I took it out of the oven, but she put it in.

I won't belabor the recipe here except to say that if you halve the recipe for a 10-inch, two-crust apple pie, you come pretty close to the right size for an 8-inch two-crust apple pie, with a little extra pastry (which is a good idea when you have nibbly helpers).  Our pie got a little burned on the top before it was done in the middle, but I slipped a piece of aluminum foil in there to protect the top crust a bit and it turned out very tasty.  And it was a really nice size, too!  One mom and three kids don't need an entire 10-inch pie.

I wish I had a spot in my kitchen for the toaster oven to live permanently available to kids, but I'm afraid that's not to be -- my spaces have to multitask pretty hard.  But I do have a little table in my kitchen that is big enough for the oven and a trivet, and so a little bit of setup is all I need.

Oversoaking the bread may not work: a lesson from a power outage.

For a variety of reasons including a power outage, yesterday's attempt at honey-oatmeal bread soaked and rose for 21 hours before I got the machine turned on.  By that time, it had nearly filled the pan.  I had added 2 Tbsp extra liquid to see if I could fix the gnarly top that I got last time, and indeed the top was very smooth, but it just didn't rise very high at all -- it made a short, dense, almost gummy loaf.  It's okay toasted, but not much better than okay.  This was the second attempt at honey-oatmeal bread, my family's mainstay for peanut butter sandwiches.

I don't know why it would have done this -- it was almost as though the yeast had spent itself.  I mean, that was my unscientific impression.  But I think I'm going to stick with 8 hours soaking time.  For one thing, since it takes almost 4 hours to bake the bread, that makes for an easy calculation of when the bread will be done:  start it now, and it'll be done in 12 hours.

I think we'll be having French toast for a couple of days. 

Topic synergy here at bearing blog: Contraceptives and muscle mass.

Where we love to rant about how bad contraceptives are for you, and also about how important it is to stay healthy and fit.

From Reuters:

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Young women seeking a sculpted, muscular silhouette may want to avoid taking oral contraceptives, U.S. researchers said on Friday.

They found women who were not taking birth control pills gained 60 percent more muscle mass after a 10-week weight training program than those who were.

The study, led by Chang-Woock Lee and Steven Riechman of Texas A&M University in College Station and Mark Newman of the University of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, will be presented at the American Physiological Society meeting in New Orleans this weekend.

The researchers studied 73 generally healthy women between 18 and 31 who completed a whole-body resistance exercise training program. About half took the pill and half did not.
...

Both groups exercised three times a week under the supervision of exercise physiologists, performing the same number and intensity of exercises.

At the end of the 10 weeks, the women who were not taking oral contraceptives had built significantly more lean muscle.

And blood samples before and after the training period showed the women on the pill had lower levels of muscle-building hormones such as testosterone and far higher levels of muscle-breaking hormones such as cortisol.

Remind me again why this s#$t is so popular?  

I suspect that men like it.  A certain type, anyway.

Soaked-flour hot dog buns in the bread machine.

Success on the first try!   

And I'm so very sorry I don't have a picture.  Mark took the camera on a business trip, said trip being why we are eating hot dogs for dinner:  I have resolved  to cook, when Mark is traveling, only those meals that make all three children happy.  So, no pictures.  Wait, there's Photo Booth:

(insert attempt at tasteful Self-Portrait With Hot Dog Bun, finally given up as lost cause)

Anyway, they were very nice.  Denser than store buns, and a little bit sweet, but very nice with hot dogs, mustard, and Bubbie's brand sauerkraut.  I was amazed at myself that they turned out pretty much the right size -- I still feel like shaping buns and bread is a bit unpredictable, and never know how big things are going to rise to in the oven.  These could double as breadsticks, or you could make hamburger buns by shaping them a little differently.

This recipe makes 8 buns.

Whole Wheat Hot Dog Buns from the bread machine ("dough" cycle)

Add to the bread machine:

• 3/4 cup plus 3 Tbsp whole milk soured with 1 Tbsp white vinegar
• 1 Tbsp honey 
• 2 cups whole wheat flour 
• 3/4 tsp bread machine yeast 

   Turn the machine to a cycle that will mix the dough (I used the "quick bread" setting), then stop the machine after dough is mixed.

Sprinkle on top of dough:

• 1/2 tsp salt 

Allow dough to rest for 8 or more hours before the machine comes on.  I wasn't going to set the timer, so I took the bread pan out and covered it with plastic wrap overnight.

A few hours before serving, begin the "dough" cycle, so that the machine mixes the salt into the dough, lets it rise, and then kneads it down again.  Turn the finished dough out onto a floured surface, dust with flour, and roll out to a rectangle about 6 inches wide, and to a thickness of about 1/2 to 1 inch thick.  Cut crosswise into eight sticks.  Arrange the sticks on a baking sheet coated with nonstick cooking spray, shaping them gently as they are arranged into fat, rounded "hot dog bun" shapes.  Cover with plastic wrap and let rise about 2 hours until they are doubled in size.

Bake at 375 degrees F for 12 minutes until nicely browned.  Slice partway through to use as hot dog buns. 

The cookbook I'm using as reference suggests that a pre-baking egg-white wash followed by a sprinkling of poppy seeds, sesame seeds, or minced onion would be a nice touch...

What I learned during Lent.

I gave up a few minor things during Lent as well, but my main Lenten discipline was 

1. to give up trying to pray the Liturgy of the Hours every day, and
2. to pray the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary instead every morning, or at least a decade and
3. not to use the computer before noon, or at least until I'd accomplished my Rosary prayer.

  

So simple, and yet sometimes so difficult.  I love the Liturgy of the Hours, a.k.a. the Divine Office.  I love praying the prayers of the whole Church.  I love the daily readings in the Office of Readings.  I agree with Flannery O'Connor who wrote in one of her letters,

Anyway, don't think I am suggesting you read the Office everyday. It's just a good thing to know about, I say Prime in the morning and sometimes I say Compline at night but usually I don't. But anyway I like parts of my prayers to stay the same and part to change. So many prayer books are awful, but if stick with the liturgy, you are safe.

I have never been a big fan of the Rosary, even though I usually do get something out of it.  But I have difficulty fitting the longer prayers of the LOTH into my day, and you have to be able to find the breviary (another thing I've not gotten into is Divine Office podcasts or reading it off the computer), and stuff.  The Rosary's easy to pick up, easy to put down, and a single decade takes hardly any time at all.  I am pretty adept at counting on my fingers if I don't have the beads with me.

Why did I do this?  I was looking for a way to get more into the habit of prayer, and the somewhat more complicated (though lovely) LOTH was difficult to do in short bursts with kids clamoring for me, and the Rosary was a lot easier even though it doesn't appeal to me as much.

On the solemnity of St. Joseph (March 19) I decided to pray the Office in honor of him, after having put it aside for weeks.  It was like water to the parched, let me tell you.  I had missed it so much.  It gave me a real appreciation for it and made me more and more resolved to use what I learned from the Rosary to re-establish the LOTH---somehow---in my life.

So.  What did I learn?

First, that avoiding the computer until my morning prayers were complete was a pretty good strategy.  I may adopt it as a general rule.

Second, that I can pray a Rosary in almost exactly the amount of time it takes me to drive to either of my two friends' houses, something I do about twice a week.   Bonus!  (No LOTH possible there, unless I learn to use podcasts.  Balancing a breviary on your knees while driving 55 mph:  not recommended.)

Third, that a single decade can be as fruitful as five.  Which makes me think:  Perhaps I can adopt an abbreviated form of each Office to be used when I am short of time.  Surely part is better than none at all, and if I planned ahead to use an abbreviated form, maybe I'd feel less frustrated when the children interrupt me and I don't "finish."

Fourth, that the Rosary is not nearly as tedious as I thought it was.  After days and days of praying the Sorrowful Mysteries alone, I kind of thought I would have stopped finding new things in them, at least for that season.  I know they are a bottomless well, but still---wouldn't they say to me everything there is to say here in this particular Lent in my particular life?  And it's true that some days I didn't see any remarkable insights.  But they still kept giving me a steady supply, every couple of days or so, of new things to ponder and take to heart and learn from.  In the future, I don't think I will feel slighted if my schedule "only" allows me to use the Rosary.

A Good Friday sermon, but good for Easter Week too, as we approach the feast of Divine Mercy next Sunday.

St. John Chrysostom preached this Good Friday sermon in the 4th century AD.   It's always been one of my favorite passages from the year's Office of Readings.  I especially like the concise catechesis on the single sentence:  "There flowed from his side water and blood."

    If we wish to understand the power of Christ’s blood, we should go back to the ancient account of its prefiguration in Egypt. “Sacrifice a lamb without blemish,” commanded Moses, “and sprinkle its blood on your doors.” If we were to ask him what he meant, and how the blood of an irrational beast could possibly save men endowed with reason, his answer would be that the saving power lies not in the blood itself, but in the fact that it is a sign of the Lord’s blood. In those days, when the destroying angel saw the blood on the doors he did not dare to enter, so how much less will the devil approach now when he sees, not that figurative blood on the doors, but the true blood on the lips of believers, the doors of the temple of Christ.

  If you desire further proof of the power of this blood, remember where it came from, how it ran down from the cross, flowing from the Master’s side. The gospel records that when Christ was dead, but still hung on the cross, a soldier came and pierced his side with a lance and immediately there poured out water and blood. Now the water was a symbol of baptism and the blood, of the holy eucharist. The soldier pierced the Lord’s side, he breached the wall of the sacred temple, and I have found the treasure and made it my own. So also with the lamb: the Jews sacrificed the victim and I have been saved by it.

  “There flowed from his side water and blood.” Beloved, do not pass over this mystery without thought; it has yet another hidden meaning, which I will explain to you. I said that water and blood symbolised baptism and the holy eucharist. From these two sacraments the Church is born: from baptism, “the cleansing water that gives rebirth and renewal through the Holy Spirit,” and from the holy eucharist. Since the symbols of baptism and the Eucharist flowed from his side, it was from his side that Christ fashioned the Church, as he had fashioned Eve from the side of Adam Moses gives a hint of this when he tells the story of the first man and makes him exclaim: “Bone from my bones and flesh from my flesh!” As God then took a rib from Adam’s side to fashion a woman, so Christ has given us blood and water from his side to fashion the Church. God took the rib when Adam was in a deep sleep, and in the same way Christ gave us the blood and the water after his own death.

  Do you understand, then, how Christ has united his bride to himself and what food he gives us all to eat? By one and the same food we are both brought into being and nourished. As a woman nourishes her child with her own blood and milk, so does Christ unceasingly nourish with his own blood those to whom he himself has given life.

It's what I plan to meditate upon this coming week.

The final form of the basic recipe: Whole wheat bread from a machine, with soaked flour.

(Other posts on soaked-flour recipes in the bread machine: 

•  an introduction and experiment #1 on keeping the yeast dry, 
•  experiment #2 (keeping the yeast dry with some of the dry ingredients), 
•   results of #2, 
•  experiment #3 (mix in the pan with only 1/2 tsp of yeast) and experiment #4 (soak the flour and liquid and add the rest later), 
•   the successful results of #3 and a consideration of how baking like this would fit into my schedule, 
•   results of #4, 
•   leaving out the sugar, 
•   the results of leaving out the sugar, 
•   the same bread with sugar but without gluten)

Results of the no-added-gluten bread with 3/4 tsp, rather than 1/2 tsp, of yeast:

Not quite perfection (the top is kind of gnarly), but the right amount of rise and a good texture.

Here it is soaking and rising in the pan before the machine came on:

So, to sum up, I started with a recipe for "buttermilk whole wheat bread" in the bread machine.  Here's how I adapted the recipe for soaking:

• Left out the added wheat gluten 
• Halved the yeast 
• Reserved the salt and added it to the top of the dough after mixing  

And here's the procedure I used with my bread machine:

• Added to the bread pan 1 and 1/2 cups whole milk soured with 1 and 1/2 Tbsp white vinegar; 2 Tbsp coconut oil; 3 cups whole wheat flour; 1 and 1/2 Tbsp sugar; 3/4 tsp bread machine yeast
• Locked the pan on the machine, set it on "quick bread," and allowed it to mix the dough.  Stopped the machine after the bread was mixed, when the machine entered the BAKE cycle. 
• Sprinkled 1 tsp salt on top of the dough. 
• Set the machine to "whole wheat" and set the timer such that the machine would not come on until the dough had rested and risen at least 8 hours in the pan. 

 The next thing I'll try to do is adapt my family's favorite recipes to this method. 

Seder.

Our pastor's homily for the Mass of the Lord's Supper (Holy Thursday -- my favorite Mass of the year) told me something I didn't know.  "There are traditionally four cups of wine drunk at the Passover meal," he said, "and the one you drink when you break the bread, the one described in John's Gospel when Jesus institutes the Eucharist, is the third of the four cups."  He went on to point out that Jesus makes a point of telling his disciples he isn't going to have the fourth cup that evening.  So they leave the upper room with the Passover meal incomplete.  This Passover celebration must include the Cross.

I realized I actually didn't know that much about the Passover Seder.  I found theWikipedia entry enlightening, and I suppose there must be even better resources out there.  But if you know nothing about how the Passover meal is traditionally celebrated, it will surely help place in context the descriptions that appear in the various places in the New Testament.  Such as the breaking of the bread:

At the head of the table is a Seder Plate containing various symbolic foods that will be eaten or pointed out during the course of the Seder. Placed nearby is a plate with three matzot [unleavened breads]....The three matzot...are connected to the three Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob...

The middle of the matzot on the Seder Plate is broken in two. The larger piece is hidden, to be used later as the afikoman, the "dessert" after the meal. The smaller piece is returned to its place between the other two matzos.

Huh, the second of three breads is broken and part of it returns to the other two while the other part is hidden.  It's not hard to imagine how deeply the story resonated with those early Christians who had taken the message of Passover in with their mother's milk.

Same bread with sugar, but without gluten.

Last time I left the sugar out of my low-yeast, long-soak-and-rise bread machine bread.  The results were pretty good.  This time I kept the sugar and left out the added gluten.

Both loaves --- the one without sugar and the one without gluten --- baked up to a similar texture, with a similar flavor.  They're both a little short, but they still have a wonderfully soft texture --- I guess that's the soaking.  

I think I will continue to put sugar in my bread, because we are all very fond of honey-oatmeal bread and molasses-rye bread.  If I always put some kind of sugar in the bread, then I'll get more-or-less consistent results, I guess.  But I think I will perhaps stop putting gluten in soaked bread recipes.

I wonder, now, if I can get the loaf to rise a little higher (even without added gluten) if I add just a bit more yeast.  I think that will be the next experimental bread.  

Results of the no-added-sugar, soaked bread from the machine.

So last time I took the sugar out and let the bread rise slowly while it soaked.  Here it is, all baked up:

The loaf is a little bit short but has a nice crumb and a good flavor.  I think that without sugar, one needs a little bit more yeast.  Something else to try.

Since I ran out of gluten yesterday, though, I already know what experiment to run next...