[budster101]

This is intended to be a respectful thread about the life and death of the Pope.


Very sad.

[nredman]

rest in peace

*hopefully this thread doesn't go bad*

[ThinkInsane]

I'm about the world's worst Catholic, but I find John Paul's death very sad. I think the world was a better place with him in it, and although I might not agree with some of his convictions, I can't see anything that the man ever did that was hateful as some like to claim. Rest in peace.

[Millennium]

I have something of a technical question.

As I understand it, there was supposed to be a ceremony this coming Wednesday appointing a bunch of new Cardinals. What happens to this? No doubt the choices had already been made, and if John Paul was smart about things -and there's no reason to believe he wasn't- then he had written them down in some form or another. It's fairly likely that the nominees had already been summoned to the Vatican.

So what happens? Will the old staff have the authority to carry out the ceremony without him? Will the appointment have to wait for a new Pope, but then proceed as before? Will the nominations be thrown out entirely, and the nominees will have to be reappointed next time?

[Geobunny]

Eternal rest grant unto him, Oh Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon him. May he rest in peace. Amen

[Geobunny]

Originally posted by Millennium:
I have something of a technical question.

As I understand it, there was supposed to be a ceremony this coming Wednesday appointing a bunch of new Cardinals. What happens to this? No doubt the choices had already been made, and if John Paul was smart about things -and there's no reason to believe he wasn't- then he had written them down in some form or another. It's fairly likely that the nominees had already been summoned to the Vatican.

So what happens? Will the old staff have the authority to carry out the ceremony without him? Will the appointment have to wait for a new Pope, but then proceed as before? Will the nominations be thrown out entirely, and the nominees will have to be reappointed next time?

I'm not entirely sure. If they weren't appointed before John Paul II died, I'm guessing nothing will happen until the new Pope swears them in. It means they'll miss out on this round of elections to decide the new Pope, but to be honest, they're probably all quite grateful - John Paul II left some mighty big shoes to be filled.

[Randman]

Only a pope can swear in cardinals.

Despite one's beliefs, or lack thereof, he was a very important figure in the late 20th century and 21st century. And as a lapsed Catholic, I didn't agree with many of his stances but I did appreciate much of what he did to heal many religious wounds, with Christians as well as Muslims and Jews.

RIP.

[Oranges for Six]

This is a perfect oppotunity to ponder upon what actuallly happens when we die. Know what? We don't have a clue.

Do you know why?

[deej5871]

Originally posted by Oranges for Six:
This is a perfect oppotunity to ponder upon what actuallly happens when we die. Know what? We don't have a clue.

Do you know why?

Jesus and Lazarus didn't tell us when they came back?

[RonnieoftheRose]

Mel Gibson hates the Pope. Christians love Mel Gibson. It doesn't add up.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by Millennium:
I have something of a technical question.

As I understand it, there was supposed to be a ceremony this coming Wednesday appointing a bunch of new Cardinals. What happens to this? No doubt the choices had already been made, and if John Paul was smart about things -and there's no reason to believe he wasn't- then he had written them down in some form or another. It's fairly likely that the nominees had already been summoned to the Vatican.

So what happens? Will the old staff have the authority to carry out the ceremony without him? Will the appointment have to wait for a new Pope, but then proceed as before? Will the nominations be thrown out entirely, and the nominees will have to be reappointed next time?

I heard on the radio (Thursday?) that there was a flurry of administrative activity going on. This was the main reason for the secrecy surrounding the Pope's condition as given by the church expert who was being interviewed.

I didn't get this expert's name, but he did mention the pending appointments, though I though I heard the term bishops used. He said they were being rushed through. Basically, the expert was saying that all the stuff that was piled up on the Pope's desk (like these appointments) was being dealt with rapidly to clear way for the transition while the Pope was still "officially" alive.

I'll see if I can quickly find a confirmed source for this.

[spacefreak]

Here... The link to the full article lists the changes, appointments, etc.

Vatican announces new batch of bishops' appointments

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Although acknowledging Pope John Paul II was in serious condition, the Vatican April 1 released a batch of new bishops' nominations that it said had been approved by the pope over the course of the previous six weeks.

The list of changes in church leadership included a number of appointments and the acceptance of several bishops' retirements, as well as the establishment of an apostolic administration in the former Soviet republic of Uzbekistan.

On another note, I find it very interesting that announcement of the Soviet involvement in the assassination attempt on the Pope was made while he was still alive. I'm sure that he's heard it before, but it's as if the Vatican/Italy waited until the last possible moment to leak the story while the Pope was still alive. They wanted the world to know that the Pope knew, yet they didn't let the word slip out when it could have potentially hindered his tenure and mission.

[Weyland-Yutani]

May he rest in piece.

[Cody Dawg]

Good thread, here.



Happy to see that everyone here is respectful, intelligent, and has positive interactions.



He said that "the Jews are the Catholics older brothers," which I thought was an awesome thing to say to be honest. He was very accepting of other cultures and religions. He truly wanted to lead by example. He was an exceptionally kind and good person.

I wonder if he will be buried at the Vatican or in Poland? I hope he is buried in Poland. He loved Poland so much. Somehow, though, I think he will be buried at the Vatican with all of the other Popes. He was number 262.

The unbroken line of Popes from the Disciple Peter to John XXIII underlies the Roman Catholic claim to be the one true church of Christ. But it is a complex line to trace�as is demonstrated in the Vatican's just-published, red-covered, 1,784-page Pontifical Yearbook for 1961. Missing from the new edition is Pope Stephen II, making Pope John the 261st Pope instead of the 262nd.

Stephen, an obscure Roman presbyter, was elected Pope on March 2-3, 752, but two days later, before he could be crowned, died of apoplexy. His fierce face still stares down at worshipers in the central nave of Rome's St. Paul's Basilica, but the current Yearbook's compiler, Msgr. Angelo Lanzoni, decided that papal coronation should be the criterion.

Most recent previous correction of the papal succession was in 1947, when the Yearbook's compiler decided that Athenian Pope St. Anacletus (circa 100-112) and Roman Pope St. Cletus (circa 78-90) were really the same man; therefore he dropped Anacletus. Confusions and discrepancies abound in ancient records. St. Felix, who died in 365, is erroneously listed as Pope Felix II (355-365); scholars still are not sure whether Dioscorus, who died in 530 and is listed as an antipope,* was not in fact legitimate, or whether Leo VIII (963-965), the candidate of Emperor Otto I who deposed his predecessor, is legitimate after all.

A 12th century error inserted a nonexistent John XV into the reign of John XIV (983-984). This error was compounded by 1) the inclusion of Antipope John XVI (997-998) in the legitimate succession, and 2) the fact that no John XV ever existed. According to these calculations, the present Pope John XXIII is really John XXI.

*A false claimant to the Holy See in opposition to a canonically elected Pope.

[Cody Dawg]

As the end approached, history's best travelled and third longest serving pontiff had urged his followers not to cry for him by dictating a message to his secretary.

"I am happy and you should be happy too," he said. "Do not weep. Let us pray together with joy."

His last moments were described early today by Father Jarek Cielecki, director of Vatican Service News, a Catholic TV channel. "The Holy Father died looking towards the window as he prayed, and that shows that in some way he was conscious," Cielecki said.

"A short while before dying, the Pope raised his right hand in a clear, although simply hinted at, gesture of blessing, as if he became aware of the crowd of faithful present in St Peter's Square, who in those moments were following the reciting of the Rosary," he added.

"Just after the prayer ended, the Pope made a huge effort and pronounced the word 'Amen'. A moment later, he died."

The official spokesman said the Last Rites had been administered again during a mass that began at 8pm. Fourteen people were present in the room as he died, including Archbishop Stanislao Dziwisz, his personal secretary, who had been with him for 40 years.

According to an unofficial report, the Pope died holding the archbishop's hand.

The chamberlain followed the prescribed ritual of calling the Pope's baptismal name, Karol, three times, ostensibly to make certain of his death. Another official pulled the Fisherman's Ring, symbol of papal power, from his finger.

The great door at St Peter's Basilica was closed and will remain so until white smoke issues from the Sistine Chapel to signify the election of a successor. Three days of national mourning were declared by the Italian government and Vatican flags flew at half-mast. The Pope's appeal for composure did not prevent a wave of grief from sweeping over St Peter's Square, where a huge crowd of well-wishers had been praying for him. John Paul had led the church for 26 years. He was the only pope many of his followers had known.

[undotwa]

The Late Pope John Paul II - intellectual of the 20th century.

[nath]

frankly disappointing to see no mention in the obituary of the renowned goalkeeping abilities of his popeness.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by nath:
frankly disappointing to see no mention in the obituary of the renowned goalkeeping abilities of his popeness.

Let's not forget his renowned Scrabble abilities; apparently he was the world champion at one point. I'm not sure what language he won in, though, if that even makes a difference (I'm not exactly familiar with tournament Scrabble).

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Let's not forget his renowned Scrabble abilities; apparently he was the world champion at one point. I'm not sure what language he won in, though, if that even makes a difference (I'm not exactly familiar with tournament Scrabble).

He spoke a number of languages.

@ Cody: According to El Mundo the Pope John Paul II will be buried in the Vatican crypt this Friday. The ceremony will begin at 10.00

[Cody Dawg]

Thank you for that information.

I read somewhere that the coffin is lead and weighs half a ton.

I thought he'd be buried at the Vatican, to be honest. He was, after all, a traditionalist.

I wish I had as much faith as he had in his pinky finger.

I have a mental list of people that if I could, I'd have had lunch with them.

One of them was John Paul II. The other was Mother Theresa. The third is the Dalai Lama.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Weyland-Yutani:
He spoke a number of languages.

That's why I have no idea what language he won in. If he were only fluent in Polish, or possiby Polish and Latin, then it would be easier to guess, but he was fluent in some twelve languages. Apparently he held a world record for number of fluencies at one point; I don't know if he still does.

[DeathToWindows]

If he was truly fluent in spoken latin, it would have made him one of very few people in the world who can speak the language as opposed to merely reading and writing it...

but that would have made a lot of sense, considering the office (and even after the Mass went to the vernacular, Latin is and was still used for official documents and statements)

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally posted by Millennium:
That's why I have no idea what language he won in. If he were only fluent in Polish, or possiby Polish and Latin, then it would be easier to guess, but he was fluent in some twelve languages. Apparently he held a world record for number of fluencies at one point; I don't know if he still does.

A truly remarkable man. I can speak four languages but I'm crap at scrabble in all of them

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

That bio really doesn't mention any of the great things he supposedly did, just how he rose to the position he was in.

So what did he do that was so fantastic anyway?

[nath]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
So what did he do that was so fantastic anyway?

he was a social conservative.

[Geobunny]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
So what did he do that was so fantastic anyway?

He was a traditionalist who didn't pander to the demands of 20th Century morality - while some may say that that was a failing, I find it hugely admirable that he stood his ground and defended his beliefs. You would find it very very hard to call him a hypocrite.

On top of that, he travelled to many different countries trying to reconcile the different religions throughout the world, as well as making efforts to reconcile the Church with the Jews.

Played a large part in the fall of Eastern European communism.

Helped to make sense of the Church vs. science debate.

He was also a great communicator (not latterly of course).

Finally, even right up to the very end of his life, he stood firm on the fact that all human life is sacred.

I'm sure there's more, but without looking up any sources on the web, I can't think of any.

PS. Rather than this thread becoming a flame war between Catholics and the rest of the world, if you disagree with what I've said, please let me know via PM and we can continue the discussion there.


[Edit: Mods, feel free to edit or delete this post if you think this thread should purely be about paying respects to Pope John Paul II ]

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by undotwa:
The Late Pope John Paul II - intellectual of the 20th century.

Very true. Amen.


Bless you Abba, peace of Christ be with you as He takes you into His own.

[Macrobat]

Lech Walesa said that he was personally responsible for saving the Solidarnosc movement toward Democracy in Poland, as well.

[Cody Dawg]

The person who is supposed to replace him as Pope will have a very hard time living up to him.

[undotwa]

Originally posted by Geobunny:
He was a traditionalist who didn't pander to the demands of 20th Century morality - while some may say that that was a failing, I find it hugely admirable that he stood his ground and defended his beliefs. You would find it very very hard to call him a hypocrite.

On top of that, he travelled to many different countries trying to reconcile the different religions throughout the world, as well as making efforts to reconcile the Church with the Jews.

Played a large part in the fall of Eastern European communism.

Helped to make sense of the Church vs. science debate.

He was also a great communicator (not latterly of course).

Finally, even right up to the very end of his life, he stood firm on the fact that all human life is sacred.

I'm sure there's more, but without looking up any sources on the web, I can't think of any.

PS. Rather than this thread becoming a flame war between Catholics and the rest of the world, if you disagree with what I've said, please let me know via PM and we can continue the discussion there.


[Edit: Mods, feel free to edit or delete this post if you think this thread should purely be about paying respects to Pope John Paul II ]

I think another important thing is that he has written many very deep philosophical works concerning sexual morality and sociology. He has incorporated many liberal social teachings whilst maintaining strictest orthodoxy. He has written extensively on what he calls 'personalism' i.e. the personal encounter with God as an important part of Catholicism and incorporated this in context of the sacraments as vital to our well being. The knowledge, depth and espcially breadth of this man is outstanding. He is one of the greatest philosophers of our time, and probably the greatest Catholic philosopher since Aquinas.

Pope John Paull II is what convinced me to remain Catholic.

[Taliesin]

I was sad when I learned that the pope became sick years ago and when that sickness became worse a few months ago, but I'm happy for him that he finally died, since it must have been very painful to live with such a sickness, and because it's likely (though not guaranteed) that he will enter paradise when judgment day arrives.

Eventhough I disagree completely with the notion of the infalliability of the pope, and with the catholic doctrine that Jesus was the son of God, or even God himself, the whole trinity-teaching... I still acknowledge the good deeds the pope has done, his work to help the poor africans, his help to free the people from the atheistic socialism/communism, but also his work to reverse wrong doctrine of past catholic times, like the animosity towards Judaism and Islam (for many centuries the belief was upheld that Islam is a religion of Satan..), and also his acknowledgment of the rights of palestinians...

Beyond that he also seemed to be a very nice and sympathetic human, so may God bless him and forgive him.

Taliesin

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Originally posted by Geobunny:
Helped to make sense of the Church vs. science debate.

Um ya right, so what was the final word on that one again?

[Zimphire]

They are one in the same.

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Did he ever talk about Dinosaurs or anything cool like that?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Socially Awkward Solo:
Did he ever talk about Dinosaurs or anything cool like that?

Who? The Pope?

Does it matter?

Or are you being a petty bitch again?

[budster101]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Who? The Pope?

Does it matter?

Or are you being a petty bitch again?

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Originally posted by Geobunny:
Finally, even right up to the very end of his life, he stood firm on the fact that all human life is sacred.

So in other words he helped fuel the fire for those Anti-abortionists who like killing doctors.

Not to mention he opposes birth control so AIDS, poverty, starvation is an epidemic in Africa. Better not to have sex with a condom and have more babies with AIDS.

[jbartone]

Originally posted by Socially Awkward Solo:
So in other words he helped fuel the fire for those Anti-abortionists who like killing doctors.

You're a ********.

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Originally posted by jbartone:
You're a ********.

No, I just have a different opinion than yours. Sure Christians think he is best thing since Jesus but others will not agree. I think he did PLENTY of bad things with his good intentions. Don't ALL bad things have good intentions though?

He also thinks Homosexuality is "Evil"

"In a new book released this week, Pope John Paul II describes same-sex marriage as part of "a new ideology of evil" that is insidiously threatening society."

"Jewish groups and Germans are also decrying the pope's book. In it, he compares abortion to the Holocaust. "

So I say to heck with him. Lets get someone with a bit more "Love" in them.

I personally don't think he did much good at all and in the end probably gave more people reason and justification to judge and hate.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by Socially Awkward Solo:
No, I just have a different opinion than yours. Sure Christians think he is best thing since Jesus but others will not agree. I think he did PLENTY of bad things with his good intentions. Don't ALL bad things have good intentions though?

He also thinks Homosexuality is "Evil"

"In a new book released this week, Pope John Paul II describes same-sex marriage as part of "a new ideology of evil" that is insidiously threatening society."

"Jewish groups and Germans are also decrying the pope's book. In it, he compares abortion to the Holocaust. "

So I say to heck with him. Lets get someone with a bit more "Love" in them.

I personally don't think he did much good at all and in the end probably gave more people reason and justification to judge and hate.

Then you really should read up a little more about the man if you think he gave a justification to judge and hate. He was an amazing man, and it's got nothing to do with my being catholic, because I'm a pretty shitty catholic. I also disagreed with some of the ideas and policies. It�s because he was an impressive man, with many accomplishments beyond his duty as priest or pope. He led an amazing life. I�d be proud to accomplish a bit of what he did in my lifetime.

He might not of felt your sexual orientation was right given the tenets of his faith, but that doesn�t mean the man ever hated you for it. His opinion was different than yours. He held fast in his beliefs, just as you do. I don�t see how that makes him a bad man. If he had ever advocated doing harm to gays, castigating them, or anything other than asking his followers to pray that they �return to the fold�. You don�t have to agree with someone on every point, or even major points, to respect them. I think the man stands on his own merits, and I base that opinion on more than a couple of sound bytes and media clips.

It seems the one of the people he gave the justification to judge was you...

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
He might not of felt your sexual orientation was right given the tenets of his faith, but that doesn�t mean the man ever hated you for it.

No, that is the sneaky way out of hating "Hate the sin love the sinner". You cannot separate the 2. His opinion is also followed blindly by millions.

Yes the pope did travel more than the others ones did, but he travelled to spread Christianity.

[JohnSmithXTREME]

It's strange how religion condemns homosexuality as a "sin", while at the same time it is quite clear that the clergy is packed with more than its share of gay men.

[deej5871]

Originally posted by Socially Awkward Solo:
No, that is the sneaky way out of hating "Hate the sin love the sinner". You cannot separate the 2. His opinion is also followed blindly by millions.

Why can't you "hate the sin and love the sinner"? Jesus' relationship with Mary Magdeline proves that you can. (Unless you mean something I don't understand you say "way out of hating 'hate the...'" You're getting out of hating a philosophy?)

Yes the pope did travel more than the others ones did, but he travelled to spread Christianity.

As opposed to spreading Islam? I mean, what do you expect him to do? He's the leader of the Catholic Church. Of course he's going to spread Christianity because that's what his job entails. He's not supposed to be a politician.

[undotwa]

Originally posted by JohnSmithXTREME:
It's strange how religion condemns homosexuality as a "sin", while at the same time it is quite clear that the clergy is packed with more than its share of gay men.

So what? You can be gay and still live a pure and chaste life.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Socially Awkward Solo:
No, that is the sneaky way out of hating "Hate the sin love the sinner". You cannot separate the 2.

Do we really have to go through this again? It is possible. It is not easy -even for most people who espouse the concept, it can be difficult to wrap one's head around at times- but thousands if not millions of people do manage it.

Yes the pope did travel more than the others ones did, but he travelled to spread Christianity.

So? As the leader of a Christian religion, this was his job. Is he to be condemned for that?

[Millennium]

Originally posted by undotwa:
So what? You can be gay and still live a pure and chaste life.

Part of the problem is that quite a few people nowadays believe that it's impossible for anyone -gay, straight, or otherwise- to live a "pure and chaste life" as many sects of Christianity define the term. Never mind that many thousands of people make a lifestyle of it.

[budster101]

Once again. SAS has to come into a thread, troll and introduce an entirely different topic.

This is an obituary thread about the Pope, not how much you hate religion. Blah-blah-blah...

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by deej5871:
Why can't you "hate the sin and love the sinner"? Jesus' relationship with Mary Magdeline proves that you can. (Unless you mean something I don't understand you say "way out of hating 'hate the...'" You're getting out of hating a philosophy?)\

Because gay is who I am, I can't chop it out, I don't want to. I like being who I am. It is not a lifestyle or a choice.

You either love me for what GOD MADE ME or take a hike.

[budster101]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Because gay is who I am, I can't chop it out, I don't want to. I like being who I am. It is not a lifestyle or a choice.

You either love me for what GOD MADE ME or take a hike.

This, in a thread about the Pope...

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Because gay is who I am, I can't chop it out, I don't want to. I like being who I am. It is not a lifestyle or a choice.

What you are saying here is debatable, but even if what you say is correct, no Levantine sacred text -not the Bible, nor the Qu'ran, nor the Talmud, nor anything else- ever said "being gay" was a sin. How could it? The people back of that time and place didn't have a concept of sexual orientation as we know it; certainly there were people who preferred one gender over another, but this phenomenon was not given a name. How can you call something a sin when you have nothing to call it at all?

Sexual intercourse between persons of the same gender was deemed a sin. The state of being attracted to persons of the same gender was not. It is an unfortunate linguistic coincidence that we give these two things the same name in English, but it is truly nothing more than that: a semantic issue. Nothing more.