BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread

Subject: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: saulgoldie
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 09:43 AM

Pope John Paul II was a)one of the great people of recent history; or b)a bane to many progressive causes. Or c)some of both and a whole lot more. Discuss among yourselves in the NON-obit thread.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: mg
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 12:57 PM

I want to know more about his vast shoe collection. I did a google search and didn't find anything but apparently someone here has information on it. I can't imagine him going out of his way to acquire more than a good set of hiking boots and some comfortable slippers, and of course cobblers etc. would probably make stuff as gifts for him...how extensive is the collection? I have a hard time imagine him shoe shopping, even by catalogs etc. mg

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: wysiwyg
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 01:08 PM

His biography shares that when it came to personal garb, John Paul's lifelong custom was to wear whatever was serviceable until it fell apart in tatters, and that he tended not to accumalte personal belongings of any kind. Chose as well to move into a few small rooms at the Vatican instead of occupying a full-tilt palace (as had predecessors). Tending to be very monastic.

Now, what he had to wear "in uniform" might have been different, but this is not the same as what one chooses to wear for oneself. My Episcopal-priest husband, for example, has lots of stuff in his closet-full of "clericals." But they are not worn on his day off, when he's on his own time.

I'm not just talking about worship-garb (vestments). As I wrote at one point here, even I (as the spouse) have "work clothes" for various work-related functions such as a luncheon following a baptism or funeral, to which sort of event we are generally invited post-liturgy. But I don't wear my "funeral dress" when my husband and I go out to dinner on our own time. Can't afford the wear and tear on it-- have to keep it pressed and ready at all times-- nor is it my personal style.

So I can see how a man involved in lots of public events (as well as liturgical ceremonial) would have various footwear suitable to the occasions.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 01:56 PM

From what I can see he did not bring the Catholic church into the 20th or even the 21st century, rather in many respects he took it backwards, re-establishing older values and spurning all progressive ideas.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 02:10 PM

I agree Giok. He was very old school--much like the millenium anti-modernist Pope Pius X.

It is no coincidence that the College of Cardinals chooses popes that negate the predecessor's influence. Pius X succeeded the reformist modernizer Leo XIII, and did his damndest to undo what Leo had done.

Same with John Paul, who did his damndest to undo the Vatican II reforms, and turn back the tide of modernization (ie birth control, recognition of the equality of women--which the Roman Catholic church STILL hasn't done, etc.) in Europe and North America in particular.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 02:13 PM

LOL I can't believe that this is important. Will we have official verification that he suffered from 'Imelda Syndrome'? Thanks, WYZI, for a note of sanity.

FWIw:
"His feet were clad in soft brown leather shoes — the same kind of shoes he almost always wore even in major ceremonies."

The Body in State

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Chris Green
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 02:48 PM

Presumably then there's a shoe shop in the Vatican City with a sign outside saying "Cobblers to the Pope"?!

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Sorcha
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 02:57 PM

I can't help but wonder just how much he really knew about the pedophile scandals......seems he did very little about them.....

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 03:44 PM

Or about the death penalty in the US--especially under Governor Dubya of Texas. He didn't even mention capital punishment when he met Dubya at the Vatican. Yet, the progressive left Catholics in the US have been at the forefront of the anti-death penalty movement in this country for decades.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: wysiwyg
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 03:52 PM

Clearly, the American governement is clearly doing such a great job at dictating world policy that it only makes sense to put US Catholics in charge of worldwide theology. Right? :~) Cuz us Americans, well, we know it's really all about us.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST, :)
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 03:53 PM

He didn't even mention capital punishment when he met Dubya at the Vatican.

That's understandable. Historically speaking, no death penalty - no Church.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: michaelr
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 04:06 PM

Bill Maher said the other night that in his opinion, Pope John Paul, through supporting Lech Walesa's Solidarity movement in Poland, had done more to end the Cold War than Ronald Reagan. Discuss!

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 04:43 PM

For many Polish Catholics, their Catholic Church is an unremarkable blend of folk superstition, nationalism, and antimodernism, just like the Irish Catholic Church is to many Irish Catholics.

To claim the Solidarity movement was the movement central to the collapse of Soviet-style communism, is to demonstrate a profound stupidity of contemporary European history.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Peace
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 04:49 PM

The USA spent the USSR to death.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Apr 05 - 04:56 PM

It pays to remember that the devout Romanist, Lech Walesa soon fell as Poland's president, and let many communists who supported his losing bid to remain in power, back in.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,Woodsie
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 03:27 AM

GUEST "a profound stupidity of contemporary European history" Demonstrates profound grammatic ingnorance

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Pauline L
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 04:09 AM

I certainly agree with Guest that the Pope was an anti-modernist "who did his damndest to undo the Vatican II reforms, and turn back the tide of modernization (ie birth control, recognition of the equality of women--which the Roman Catholic church STILL hasn't done, etc.) in Europe and North America in particular."

I burn up, as I have for years, when I hear people say that the Pope was wonderful because he was humble and related well to common folk. Yesterday I heard someone rhapsodize on this theme and add that he was great because he made several trips to North and South America. (?) When I hear people say that he carried on the work and spirit of Vatican II, I really can't stand it. I consider it close to blasphemy.

This Pope was a man with a theatrical career who maintained his sense of drama when addressing the masses. He manged to convince many of them that he was one of them. He opposed liberation theology, abortion, equality of women (notably with regard to keeping them out of the priesthood), and Communism. In fact, he reminded me of Ronald Reagan, who was not one of my heroes.

I hate to think about what would have happened if he had suffered severe brain damage and been kept alive with a feeding tube for 15 years.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: RichM
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 04:48 AM

I speculate that a pope who suffered a long term coma would be allowed to die,at the discretion of those in charge of the church. The public would never, of course, hear about this decision.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 06:02 AM

Not surprising Rich, the churches have many hundreds of years experience in hushing up scandals, and concealing its actions.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 06:12 AM

RichM ~ I strongly suspect that is what was behind his 'refusal to go into hospital' - either his own strength of mind to die peacefully in what had become his home, or the determination of his colleagues that there would be no long, drawn out and lingering descent into the void.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST, :)
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 07:16 AM

In his own words,,,

"To American cardinals summoned to the Vatican during church sex abuse scandal involving U.S. priests on April 23, 2002:

The abuse which has caused this crisis is by every standard wrong and rightly considered a crime by society; it is also an appalling sin in the eyes of God."


Fair enough, but why didn't he finish the job? ie "...and from this day forward the priesthood welcomes women and the married, to protect the faithful from those who would hide their appalling 'sinfulness' behind the vestments of sacred celibacy"

"In a 1994 letter on the ban on women as priests:

I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

An interesting example of 'papal bull'. The Church is no democracy. All the Church's faithful and all the Church's men couldn't put women's dignity together again - without the authority of the Vatican, that is.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 08:27 AM

Agreed about the negatives, but surely, he did some good things too? Otherwise how could such a "wrongdoer" remain head of the biggest community in the world (>1 billion people) for more than quarter of a century? The power of excommunication as a threat is powerful, sure, but could that alone keep him in place for so long?

One "good" thing I propose to try and balance things a little is his apology to Jews and Muslims for their treatment during the Crusades. Yes, it's taken centuries; but he DID it, which is more than one can say for some of the leaders of smaller communities (nations, for example), with a lot more to apologise for.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 08:35 AM

Doc Martens boots were apparently favoured by John Paul. Others with the same taste in footwear have included Billy Bragg, Pete Townshend, Noddy Holder, Ian Dury, Joe Strummer, John Peel, and the Dalai Lama.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 08:45 AM

You set of winging negative people - this man was a good man who did his best for people all his life - I feel sorry for your enemies if this is how you attack a good guy.

Take a step back a look at yourselves

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 09:17 AM

Not exactly an objective thought guest, our discussion will not stop his beatification which is a foregone conlusion. Nobody however is 100% perfect, and it is good in the midst of all the glory laud and honour that inevitably follows the death of such a high profile person, to inject a touch of reality into the subject. Nobody has slagged him off, or said he was a waste of space, we have merely discussed his shortcomings, and the problems of the Roman Catholic church in general. Nobody is above criticism anyway!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Kim C
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 10:07 AM

I am not Catholic, but I have always had the greatest respect for this Pope. That position takes an unbelievable amount of dedication. Let's not forget, though, that the Pope is still a man, after all, and subject to the same mistakes men make. You can't make everyone happy all the time.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 10:09 AM

Well, there's not much point in singling out this Pope for criticism regarding the Church's traditional misogyny and (misguided) intrusion into the most intimate and personal of human affairs. He was born in 1920, NOT 1960 after all. Bound as he was by generational and institutional limitations, he did the very best he possibly could I suppose.

After all, Has the papal stance on human sexuality and the status of women changed at all in almost 500 years? I think not ...

"We have in our days the distinguished professor of divinity, brother Heinrich Kaltyseren, Inquisitor of Heretical Depravity. Last year, while he was exercising his inquisitorial office in the city of Cologne, as he himself told me, he found in the neighborhood a certain maiden who always went about in a man's dress, bore arms and dissolute garments like one of nobles' retainers; she danced in dances with men, and was so given to feasting and drink that she seemed altogether to pass the bounds of her sex, which she did not conceal ...

But the wretched woman would not obey the commands of the Church; the count protected her from arrest and brought her secretly out of Cologne; thus she did indeed escape from the inquisitor's hands but not from the sentence of excommunication. Thus bound under curse, she quitted Germany for France, where she married a certain knight, to protect herself against ecclesiastical interdict and the sword. Then a certain priest, or rather pimp, seduced this witch with talk of love; so that she stole away with him at length and went to Metz, where she lived as his concubine and showed all men openly by what spirit she was led...

Moreover, there was lately in France, within the last ten years, a maid of whom I have already spoken, named Joan, for her prophetic spirit and for the power of her miracles. For she always wore man's dress, nor could all the persuasions of any doctors [of divinity] bend her to put these aside and content herself with woman's garments, especially considering that she openly professed herself a woman and a maid. "In these masculine garment she said, "in token of future victory, I have been sent by God to preach both by word and by dress, to help Charles, the true king of France, and to set him firm upon his throne from whence the king of England and the duke of Burgundy are striving to chase him" ....

then at last, by God's will, as it is believed, she was taken in arms by the English and cast into prison. A great multitude were then summoned, of masters both in Canon and in Civil Law, and she was examined for many days. And, as I have heard from Master Nicolas Amfici [Coulton not: this seems to be a scribal error for Nicolas Midi] Licentiate of Theology, who was ambassador for the University of Paris, she at length confessed that she bad a familiar angel of God, which, by many conjectures, and proofs, and by the opinion of the most learned men, was judged to be an evil spirit; so that this spirit rendered her a sorceress; wherefore they permitted her to be burned at the stake by the common hangman ...

PUPIL: I cannot sufficiently marvel how the frail sex can to rush into such presumptuous things. MASTER: These things are marvelous to simple folk like you!, but they are not rare in the eyes of wise men. For there three things in nature, which, if they transgress the limits of their own condition, whether by diminution or by excess attain to the highest pinnacle whether of goodness or of evil. These are, the tongue, the ecclesiastic, and the woman; all of these are commonly best of all, so long as they are guided by a good spirit, but worst of all if guided by an evil spirit.

From C.G. Coulton, ed, Life in the Middle Ages, (New York: Macmillan, c.1910), Vol I, 210-213 [text slightly modernized]"


Hmmm - I wonder what commonly happens when the "holier" sex is guided by "evil spirits" (if such a thing is even possible)? Would Inquisitors of Heretical Depravity be then elevated to positions of public authority? Would the faithful be inundated by an onslaught of Papal Bull?    ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 10:10 AM

Oops that should have read "almost 600 years".

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Amos
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 10:45 AM

Daylia:

A charming post, thanks for the excerpt. Insanity is no less appealing when it gets gussied up in the language of superstition, authority and office. What codwallopery, I swan!


A

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: wysiwyg
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 10:52 AM

Has it occurred to anyone yet that the teachings that are so hard for women, might actually be teachings aimed at the MEN the women are involved with? Anyone actually read any of the material that is the foundation for the conservative policies?

And how do y'all account for the increased numbers of Catholics, especially youth, in the third world, who have embraced the faith as presented (conservatively)?

It's often been said (at Mudcat) that historically, gummints helped impose the faith on people to keep them in line. How do ya'll account for the continued adherence to (and spread of) the faith in countries where it was explicityly outlawed and violently suppressed?

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 12:56 PM

Incidentally, you can't really blame the Pope of the day or the Church of the time for what the English did to Joan of Arc, subsequently declared a saint by the Church.
.......................

People are like that WYSIWYG - in the States I think the word is "ornary". Here we'd say "bloody minded". More precisely, when a detestable government is trying to stomp on something, a lot of people are likely to recognise what is good about it. I find that a very encouraging thought.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: PoppaGator
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 01:11 PM

Much as I disagree with the generally anti-progressive syance of the late Pope (which was not entirely a personal quirk of his, but rather the long-standing policy of the institution he headed), I think he deserves tremendous credit for reconciliation with the Jewish people as well as with other religions (including Islam).

Also, no one will convince me that his support of Solidarity did not have a great deal to do with the fall of Soviet Communism. The sponsors of his attempted assasination apparently felt the same way, too. Of coure, the simple fact that he was a Pole and had lived under both Nazi/fascist and Soviet/communist totalitarianism, and that he became the first non-Italian Pope in centuries, set him up in a unique historical position.

Yes, the spending war was the straw the broke the Soviet camel's back, but without the widespread defiant non-violent resistance of whole populations, first in Poland and later throughout Eastern Europe and Russia, the whole structure of Communist rule wouldn't have fallen apart nearly so suddenly.

By the way, for the record, the immediate halt/reversal to the Church reforms that grew out of Vatican II should be credited to John XXIII's immediate successor Paul VI ~ not to the recently departed JPII.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 01:16 PM

Susan, it is easy to account for the growth of Catholics in the third world: bribing the poor to convert by giving them what their governments don't: subsistence assistance. A large chunk of the money raised by the church goes to support the missions. With the first world economic boom in the 90s, the church was getting a lot more money from the first world, and spending it in the third. As it should be, of course. But that money from the church's missions always has strings attached.

Also, the Roman Catholic church has always assimilated the indigenous religions of the peoples it evangelizes by adapting the folk superstitions of the indigenous population to the folk superstitions of Catholicism, unlike many of it's more stringent Protestant evangelizers, who are more stridently Calvinistic in their leanings. The Catholic church is much more ritualized than most the Protestant churches too, and most indigenous religions are full of ritual. So in that sense, the evangelized are merely adapting one set of rituals to another.

Ah, and daylia. The church has actually come pretty far from the drivel you quote. Perhaps you could familiarise yourself with something a bit more current. And also realize that the majority of activist Catholic laity these days are women, not men. And that there is already a place for women in the Catholic church, and that they wield a lot of power in those arenas--especially in the missions, in education, and in health care. Certainly more power than women have in any other religions I can think of off hand.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 01:39 PM

McGrath, it was through the authority and actions of the Church and the Pope(s) of the time that the infamous trials of the Inquisition (including Joan's) and the body of Canon Law which supported them were carried out. According to this article

"Long charged with the investigation of cases involving superstition, the medieval inquisition found its activity increased in 1484, when Innocent VIII directed Jacob Sprenger and Henry Kramer, inquisitors in Germany, to examine persons accused of witchcraft ... Sprenger and Kramer published a better-known book and one that long exercised a decided influence on witchcraft trials. Their Hammer of Witches (Malleus maleficarum) dealt with the nature and evils of witchcraft and the court procedures for trying cases. Designed as a help to inquisitors, it became the textbook on sorcery and witchcraft and lay on the desk of jurists and judges, Catholic and Protestant, for a long time to come. It is still held up as a notorious symbol of the mass hysteria that spread over Catholic and Protestant Europe for several centuries."

Here is Sprenger and Kramer's (those darlings of Pope Innocent (???) VIII The Malleus Malificarum (Hammer of Witches). And a couple of it's Church-ordained decrees about women, to whet your appetite ...

"Thus Saint John Chrysostom says, about the text "it is not good to marry" [from Matthew 19], "what else is woman but a foe to friendship, an inescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic danger, a delectable detriment, an evil of nature, painted with fair colors...

Others again have given other reasons why there are more superstitious women than men. And the first is, that they are more credulous; and since the chief aim of the devil is to corrupt faith, therefore he attacks them. See Ecclesiasticus 19: "He that is quick to believe is light-minded, and shall be brought down."

The second reason is that women are naturally more impressionable, and more ready to receive the influence of a disembodied spirit, and that when they use this quality well they are very good, but when they use it badly they are very evil.

The third reason is that they have slippery tongues, and are unable to conceal from their fellow-women those things which they know through their evil arts. And since they are weak, they find a secret and easy manner of vindicating themselves by witchcraft.... Since they are feebler both in mind and body, it is not surprising that they should come more under the spell of witchcraft. For as regards intellect, of the understanding of spiritual things, they seem to be of a different nature than men...

But the natural reason is that she is more carnal than a man, as is clear from her many carnal abominations. And it should be noted that there was a defect in the formation of the first woman, since she was formed from a bent rib, that is, a rib of the breast, which is bent as it were in a contrary direction to a man. And since through this defect she is an imperfect animal, she always deceives."


The fact that Joan was spared having to defend herself against the divine wisdom of the yet-unwritten "Witch's Hammer" doesn't appear to have helped her too much as she faced the Church's Inquisitors. Oh well, after reading all that, methinks this imperfect animal needs to to go put her Hair Shirt back on.

Or maybe just say 10 Hail Marys or something?     ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 01:47 PM

Certainly more power than women have in any other religions I can think of off hand.

??? Did you think of the Anglican Church, offhand? Or maybe the Wiccan Church, or the United Church, or the Unity Church or or .... never mind, GUEST. I like your optimism, anyway!

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: PoppaGator
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 02:00 PM

Geez, *daylia*, medaeval Christianity was pretty unenlightened, wasn't it?

I don't usually find myself in the position of an apologist for Catholicism, but when you go that far back into pre-Reformation history to find something to criticize, you're really confronting the shared history of all western-Christian churches, Protestant as well as Catholic.

And while I'm at it: GUEST of 01:16 PM ~

Fundamentalist/Evangelical Protestantism is doing quite well gaining converts in Latin American, better than Roman Catholicism in many areas, but I don't believe that it is at all valid to characterize the successful Protestant proseletyzers either as "stridently Calvinist" or as less likely than Catholic missionaries to offer financial/material charity to those they seek to convert. They make a very emotional appeal ~ generally, less ascetic/intellectual than that presented by Catholicism ~ and they have plenty of American dollars to spread around. I'm not saying that one group is appreciably better or worse than the other, but I think you're way off base in characterizing Catholic missionaries as greater offenders than their Protestant counterparts either in theological style or for "buying" allegiance with handouts.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 02:14 PM

It has never been proved, Poppagator, that the assassin who attempted to kill the pope, was aligned with any communist organizations whatsoever. The guy was Turkish, claimed to have done it for Palestine. When that was shown to be bogus, he then claimed to have been paid by some shadowy Bulgarians. No links were ever proved, though the most popular conspiracy theory/urban legend about the attempt was that it was "the Communists".

You seem to forget that Lech Walesa was the head of a secular trade union, who was thrown out of power by the Poles very quickly when it became clear his agenda had more to do with religious attacks on their secular state, than worker's rights. Poles don't want a Catholic state, they want a secular state. Did you forget that was a worker's revolution, which got it's start in food riots? In Poland, the workers used the church, and the church used the workers in the battle for post-Soviet political power.

While the pope's 1st trip to Poland in 1979 put Poland on the international map, internally it was the 1984 murder of dissident priest Jerzy Popieluszko by Polish security agents that triggered the final series of events that triggered the most intense and radical social unrest that led to the fall of the Jaruzelski government. The Polish Episcopate had acted as power broker, and pushed much harder for political recognition in the post-1989 era by co-opting the much more radical workers movement. That was done largely through Lech Walesa, who wasn't exactly the brightest bulb in the box on the worker's movement side. He is the one the church chose to back because he was devoutly Catholic and conservative in his social views. He wasn't very representative of the Polish population at all, hence his rather quick exit from the political scene. Once the church didn't need him as their pawn, well...

One result of the church acting as political power broker was that when the Sejm began deliberations on a new constitution in 1990, the Episcopate requested that the document virtually abolish the separation of church and state. Such a change of constitutional philosophy would put the authority of the state behind such religious guarantees as the right to religious education and the right to life beginning at conception (hence a ban on abortion).

As a political matter, however, the unleashing of stronger church influence in public life began to alienate parts of the population within two years of the passage of the bill that restored freedom of religion. In the period that followed, critical issues were the reintroduction of religious instruction in public schools--which happened nationwide at church insistence, without parliamentary discussion, in 1990--and legal prohibition of abortion. Almost immediately after the last communist regime fell, the church began to exert pressure for repeal of the liberal communist-era abortion law in effect since 1956. The draconian anti-abortion laws passed in 1993, and the church won the right to trump EU human rights law when it got an exemption for Poland's anti-abortion law, but still allowed the country into the EU. Ireland and Malta also have this human rights anti-abortion exemption.

All the major international human rights organizations, including the United Nations, have stridently opposed these human rights violations in Poland. The battle is still raging, as the current Polish government, which promised the liberalisation of the abortion laws when elected in 2001, is still dragging it's feet. However, it is looking as though a new law may be passed, allowing abortions up until the 12th week of pregnancy. An estimated 200,000 illegal abortions are occurring in the country each year as a result of the criminalisation of abortion in 1993.

When you look at the dynamics of the collapse of Soviet-style communism in Eastern Europe in Russia, it really had fuck all to do with the pope. Take Czechoslovakia for instance. Nothing religious about that anti-communist movement whatsoever. Same with Russia proper. There was doctrinal change in the wake of a hardliner's death--Brezhnev's--when the reformers led by Gorbachev took over, and refused to intervene in Poland, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary as each country abandoned and ousted their communist dictators. It wasn't until the perestroika reformers allowed the collapse of the dictatorships, and allowed the nationalist Balkanizing of the republics occurred, that the Soviet economy collapsed. But it was pushed over the cliff by the Soviet reformers themselves, NOT the pope and NOT Ronald Reagan.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 03:00 PM

Also Poppagator, I didn't intend to claim that Catholic evangelizing was better/worse than Protestant evangelizing. I was merely trying to say they take different approaches to the same strategy: bribing the third world poor to convert to their religions, by providing subsistence assistance with religious strings attached, which in turn have geo-political repercussions.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 09:25 AM

Moslems are gaining many converts too!
G.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Raptor
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 10:02 PM

I can't help thinking if we were to pick apart the jewish religion like this we would be labled anti-semetic.

Or if it were some other religion we would be labled racist or bigots.

And where is Martin Gibbon to tell us what we should think and then to F-Off?

Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Once Famous
Date: 06 Apr 05 - 10:08 PM

Hi Rupture, here I am.

Think what you want. There's no Moslems here I don't believe.

Thank God. I'd sure hate for one to explode here.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 06:52 AM

Or if it were some other religion we would be labled racist or bigots. (Raptor)

I think you're right there, some might do it, but that's not a valid reason in my eyes not to have a thread like this focused on JPII and the religion he stood for.

Discussing problems, crimes, or erros of one person or one religion doesn't get any better by mentioning unrelated or even similar problems of other persons or religions.

Joe Offer has written in the other thread what he would like to change in the Catholic church and has addressed some very specific Catholic problems arising from celibacy of priests, never ending marriage etc. I wish at least some of the changes he wishes for are made for all of them are changes to the better in my eyes. Pedophilia by priests for instance would drop drastically I think if celibacy would stop to be a requirement.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Raptor
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 07:34 AM

Pedophilia by priests would drop drasticicaly if we SHOT the bastards!

Celibacy for priests is about complete devotion to god as a higher calling!

The problem I feel lies in the guidlines for ordination!

Not the life that a priest must follow!

My original point here is that there is a fine line between debating something and bashing someone else's religion!

Some here have crossed that line!

Touchey subject.

Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: mg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 12:02 PM

I don't think celibacy per se leads to pedophilia...more of the culture of sex itself being considered so unthinkable that they avoid women and then perverted things occur. If they needed sex, and who can blame them, vows or not, there were always women or other men if that was their inclination. The whole little boy thing is so way beyond that....I can't explain it but I think I can vaguely see how it all happened...it is very sick and it is or at least was the extreme part of the culture of fearing sex so much that it comes out in perverted awful ways. mg

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Once Famous
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 12:28 PM

I wonder if that has happend to all of those guilt ridden Catholic girls I used to date.

I can picture 1 or 2 of them with their own torture rooms now.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: wysiwyg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 12:46 PM

The link between celibacy and pedophilia in the priesthood is not about unfilled sexual needs turning deviant. It's about a situation (access to boys) attracting pedophiles to that career. The idea about ending the requirement about celibacy is that married priests are assumed not to be pedophiles. Of course that's not a sound assumption covering any one individual, but statistically it's thought to give a better chance of preventing abuse.

History Channel (US cable) has been running a wonderful series about the papacy today, called "Saints and Sinners." It's pretty good on abuses and excellence of the papacy during certain historical periods, FWIW. It's very interesting looking at the abuses in light of the history and trends of the times.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Donuel
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 01:09 PM

CNN reported today that the Vatican claims the former Popes personal notes andpapers were ordered to be burned upon his death.

If he was implicated in the poisoning death of his predecesor, we will never know.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 01:23 PM

I am sure he wrote in dear diary that he murdered the preceeding pope.

And it is more a matter of Catholicism as it has been rendered in my lifetime producing pedophiles than random pedophiles joining the church..both are probably going on but they are produced. By a repressive religion and perhaps saintly mothers and don't get me started on Christian brothers... mg

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: wysiwyg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 01:33 PM

mg, that's a pretty extreme simplification of a much more complex picture. It's not necessary to reduce an issue that far in order to deplore wrongs that have been done; addressing the wrongs almost always requires seeing and addressing increased complexities, not reducing them to what can only be dealt with reactively.

Returning hatred for wrongs done cripples the hater, and does little to change the hated.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Donuel
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 01:46 PM

Returning hatred for wrongs done cripples the hater, and does little to change the hated.
~Susan




There you have it. Victims should not only avoid being reactive, they should like what happens to them.

Its nice to have it both ways when you are in power.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: wysiwyg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 01:52 PM

Donuel, now you're being silly!

A better statement might be, "Victims can find more powerful, non-victim ways to respond to mistreatment than hatred."

To conclude that someone once victiminzed remains forever in the victim role is to deny the power inherent in seeing oneself as a survivor with unlimited choice to apply in one's future.

Anyone overcoming anything knows that!

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Donuel
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 02:00 PM

I'm not being silly, I'm being reactive and confrontational ;)

The Church had one decent Pope during the 20th century. A vibrant, healthy man, who had been an outstanding priest, he seemed about to actually do some good.

Then, a few months after being elected, they poisoned him. An autopsy was refused and he was embalmed within hours of his death.

There is no doubt that the man who died yesterday knew all about this and may very well have been involved in the murder.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Wesley S
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 02:08 PM

Donuel - Can you provide any links to some facts in the case or should we just take your word for it ?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Donuel
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 02:42 PM

Pope John Paul II personal notes.

Opps, they've been burned...case closed.

One thing for sure...
Whatever happened when there were 3 Popes in one year will not be revisited by the Vatican - ever.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: wysiwyg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 02:59 PM

Say, does anyone remember how we all got along in life before everything had to be a conspiracy-theory argument?

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 03:02 PM

I would want to know more about the death of John Paul I. It is truly mysterious. I have never heard of this pope being implicated in his murder. Please elaborate. mg

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 03:03 PM

I was trying to say that the pedophile problem is much more intrinsic to the church than people who are already inclined that way becoming priests to have access and/or cover. mg

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Wesley S
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 03:24 PM

I guess we just have to accept all of the evidence of the Pope's murder on ---- faith.

It's a dirty word I know.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Once Famous
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 03:36 PM

Pedophile problem AND cult style homosexual activity.

For sure the latter, probably for centuries.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 04:20 PM

Well, Donuel, many people thought John XXIII was more than just a "decent pope." He was pope from 1958 to 1963, and there were others before him who were pretty good people, too. John Paul I was elected in 1978, and I believe it was only 30 days or so after his election that he died. I'm sure there are conspiracy theorists who are certain that John Paul I was poisoned by people directed by John Paul II, a Pole who was outside the Vatican political structure, who was then elected by a 2/3 vote of all the cardinals from all over the world. I suppose all those cardinals were also involved in the conspiracy, huh?

You know, this really sounds like total, unmitigated bullshit. If it isn't that, then it must be the anti-Catholic bigotry the Ku Klux Klan was so famous for in the 1920's. Donuel, you should be ashamed of yourself for perpetuating such garbage.


Somebody above condemned John Paul II for not mentioning capital punishment when George W. Bush visited the Vatican. Bush wasn't in much of a position to affect the death penalty one way or another at the time, but it is patently unfair to imply that John Paul II supported the death penalty. He repeatedly stated that there is no justification whatsoever for capital punishment, except in a very few situations where the condemned person poses a grave threat to society (such as, perhaps, an Osama bin Laden or somebody whose followers might kill thousands to free an imprisoned leader). But the Pope said that even that one exception was well-nigh inconceivable in modern society. It's about as close to a complete condemnation of the death penalty as anybody could make. Conservative Catholics don't talk much about the Catholic Church's opposition to the death penalty because it makes them very uneasy, but it's official church doctrine that capital punishment is immoral.

It is a blatant falsehood to imply that John Paul II supported or even tolerated capital punishment.

I also want to emphasize that John Paul II strongly and repeatedly opposed George Bush and the United States and their war in Iraq. He also opposed the Likud government of Israel in its treatment of Palestinians, and he opposed Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines long before the United States did.

No, he didn't singlehandedly ride to Poland on a white horse and save his country and the world from godless Communism, but he certainly was a major factor in the fall of the Warsaw Pact.

Yes, I do wish John Paul II had been less conservative in internal church matters, and I strongly opposed him on many matters. Nonetheless, I firmly believe that he did very well in promoting social justice and humanitarism. In almost every instance, he sided with the poor and the oppressed. Maybe he wasn't completely right every single time, but he did his best. He may have been anti-Communist to the point where he was blind to the good aspects of Communism, but he was just as strongly opposed to capitalist imperialism.

Yes, I wish that John Paul II had done more to promote the equality of women. He actually did much to promote the dignity and rights of women, although he failed to put women in leadership positions in the Catholic Church. However, it shold be remembered that there are tens of millions of Catholics, particularly in Africa, Latin America, and Asia, who are not ready to accept the equality of women. How do you deal with that in a worldwide church? I have to say I don't know.

So, what's the bit about the shoes? As far as I can tell, John Paul II made some people uncomfortable because he alway wore plain, ugly, brown shoes. Maybe he should be condemned to hell for having no fashion sense.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 04:45 PM

Brown shoes? Guest convinced some of us that he had a shoe collection somewhat comparable to Imelda. It was news to me and I ams till waiting to hear. mg

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: jaze
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 06:58 PM

According to a prophecy I read recently, only two more popes to go. A peace-loving pope next, and then another named Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: wysiwyg
Date: 07 Apr 05 - 08:37 PM

Hey, I get it! A non-obit means he didn't die? :~) Works for me!

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Wolfgang
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 12:38 PM

Speaking about conspiracy theories we've heard after the death of this pope:

The US government has started the campaign against pedophilia in the Catholic church in order to weaken the pope as a punishment for his stance against the war in Iraq.

The Green deputy speaker of the German parliament was it in a talk show, but she's know for very weird beliefs.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: kendall
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 08:02 AM

Is anyone besides me furious at bush for his treatment of PRESIDENT CARTER?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 09:19 AM

Don't see why his banning women from the priesthood makes him a reactionary or even a bad person.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,Allen
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 09:42 AM

On the radio a few days ago they talked to an 85 year old man who was classmates with the late Pope. He said everyone would copy from him in class!

I do think the Pope was a good man who stood by his convictions and tried to better the lot of his people and promote Christ.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 10:18 AM

kendall, I was asking why Carter wasn't part of the presidential delegation early last week, when it was announced and Carter wasn't on the list.

What's the deal?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: kendall
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 02:47 PM

He has had to guts to oppose bush in some things. Remember how they got even with Dan Rather? He had the balls to ask hard questions too.The Emperor has no clothes, or brains.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 04:23 PM

Before we go condemning Bush for excluding Jimmy Carter from the funeral delegation, I'd like to hear what happened. If we don't hear any complaint from Carter and don't have solid information about an intentional snub, then I think it's best to assume there's no issue.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Pauline L
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 04:41 PM

I've read that the Pope promoted social justice, but I'm not aware of any specifics, other than his opposition to Communist governments and capital punishment. Joe Offer said, "John Paul II strongly and repeatedly opposed George Bush and the United States and their war in Iraq." I missed that one, too. Joe, can you give me some details?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 08:18 PM

Hi, Pauline - this Google search (click) will bring up a number of articles about John Paul II and his oopposition to the Iraq War, and to war in general. This article covers the subject well, and this one says he spoke against the previous Gulf War 56 times. This AP article is current, and discusses the relationship between the Pope and U.S. Presidents.

I may have disagreed with John Paul II about a number of things, but not on his positions on social justice issues. He opposed capital punishment, nuclear weapons, and most warfare. He also showed a great deal of concern for the poor of the world.

This article says that early as 1979, John Paul II call for the IRA to end its cycle of violence in Ireland - and so-called Catholics of the IRA issued a statement in defiance of his plea.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 08:58 PM

I had read that Carter had declined because there "were other people who really wanted to attend." The official invitation to the funeral was for a 5-member presidential delegation. That did and should have included President Carter. Instead, the five-person party consisted of President Bush, his wife, Laura, former president Bill Clinton, former president G.H.W. Bush and Condoleeza Rice, the Secretary of State. They said that Gerald Ford at age 90 is too frail for such a trip. But why Rice??? A second delegation from the US government also attended- it seems that there is where Rice fit. I'm with Kendall- it infuriates me. Carter was MUCH more of like mind and respect with John Paul II than the bush ever thought of being.

The Washington Post


"The reason has touched off a classic Washington imbroglio fueled by suspicion, animosity and distrust, one that has reopened a rift between the camps of the former president and the current one. When Carter was left off the delegation list assembled by President Bush's White House, Democrats assumed he was snubbed. The Bush The Bush team is angry at what it considers an unfair smear."


"According to people on both sides most familiar with the discussions, the episode grew out of a sequence of telephone calls during a fluid two days that evidently left room for misunderstanding. White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. called Carter at least twice to invite him to join the delegation. Carter initially accepted, but when Card called back and reported that others were interested in joining a delegation limited to five members, the former president withdrew." (Why did Card make that call? What other response would have he expected from Jimmy Carter? Eb)

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: mg
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 09:14 PM

I think the one to step aside should have been Mrs. Bush rather than Dr. Rice. mg

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 10:40 PM

mary I think you may have misunderstood. The "five person delegation" just refers to the presidents & secretary of state. The spouses of the political invitees aren't counted in the five.

But you are correct, Dr. Rice should not have been on the delegation, and Carter certainly should have. Andrew Card reneged on the invitation to Carter, not once but twice, apparently. And that is just downright sleazy.

No surprise that Jimmy Carter is being a gracious gentleman about it though.

I also understand that Andrew Card wormed his way into the president's delegation, being a "sixth wheel". What a pig.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 10:42 PM

And as to the pope admonishing the IRA to stop the violence: excuse me, but it is idiotic to admonish only one side for being violent in a war, isn't it? But I hear that Ireland may have had the final word. According to some right wing pundits I saw on tv today, Ireland DARED not to declare the day of the pope's funeral a national day of mourning, like Poland did.

The audacity!

Erin go bragh.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 02:44 AM

Think what you will of Bush, being president he still has to attend.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 04:57 AM

Well, I dunno. Seeing as the Pope is Catholic and the IRA are Catholic, it seems to make sense for him to admonish his own side first, if they're doing wrong. It wouldn't do a whole heck of a lot of good for the Pope to admonish Irish Protestants, and it would be seen as supporting the wrongdoing of the Catholic side.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 06:02 AM

Spoken like a true political know nothing Joe.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: RichM
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 08:05 AM

Dear Guest: What a maroon!

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 08:10 AM

The pope wasn't exactly the brightest bulb in the box when it came to conflict resolution in places like Ireland, the Balkans, Rwanda, etc.

Hell, the pope couldn't even be bothered to go to the north and visit Armagh when he visited. What might that have done for the joke we call "the Northern Irish peace process" hmmmmmm?

The pope simply mouthed the same blanket condemnations of the IRA we've heard from 10 Downing and Westminster for decades when it came to Northern Ireland. And we can see how well that strategy has worked out.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,Scaramouche
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 11:16 AM

Ok, guest, what would you have done?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 11:22 AM

He should have walked with the kids trying to get to Holy Cross school everyday.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 11:33 AM

Good on ya there, Guest 11:22 AM!

Also Scaramouche, there is that pesky little detail about Rwandan priest Father Wenceslas Munyeshyaka becoming the first priest convicted of genocide by an international war crimes tribunal.

Oops! I guess we forgot about how the Roman Catholic church in Rwanda participated in the genocide, and failed to stop the slaughter where it could have. Predictably, the official Vatican line is that only individual priests, not the church as a whole in Rwanda, can be held accountable for the genocide. It's the familiar "just a few bad apples" excuse.

However, in a meticulously reported series of articles on the aftermath of the Rwanda genocide of 1994, Newsday foreign editor Dele Olojede spares no one-including Rwanda 's dominant Roman Catholic Church. During the 1994 murders, approximately 800,000 members of the Tutsi tribe were exterminated by the Hutus. "Some of the worst massacres," Olojede reported "occcured right inside churches and parish compounds, many with the active collaboration of [Hutu] priests." Olojede also notes that other priests risked their own lives in order to save the lives of Tutsi and were often massacred with their parishioners. But, he notes, "many more become footsoldiers in the extermination campaign or passively accepted its inevitability."

Rwanda Archbishop Thaddee Ntihinyurwa declared, "Many have asked, how can a Christian country do this? My answer is that you can't talk only about Rwanda…the first genocides happened in Christian countries also, like Germany and Armenia."

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: Pauline L
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 11:46 AM

I understand that the Catholic Church is opposed to killing, and that includes war, abortion, and capital punishment, a mixed bag IMO. I also remember reading that the Pope at the time of the Holocaust remained silent about it. I'm still looking for something about John Paul II as a specific Pope that I can admire. He may have expressed sympathy with the poor people of the world, but did he advocate or do anything specific to help them? Talk is cheap. I admire the activism of the Pope who brought about Vatican II. That had a noticeable effect on dissolving barriers between peoples. I know that JP II forgave Jews and Muslims, but that is such a condescending act from "God's best religion."

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 12:53 PM

The Armenia bit is a red herring.

Pius XII, Pope during WWII, was as different from John Paul II as night is from day. If you are looking for something to admire, start from his days in the Polish Partisans. He APOLOGISED to Jews and Muslims, not patronising at all.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,Scaramouche
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 12:58 PM

You haven't answered my question. Anyway do the vile actions of those Rwandan priests make him a bad person? By the same logic the incredible bravery of the priests that did try and stop the killing should reflect on him. In fact the latter are closer to his own past.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 01:01 PM

No, they don't make the pope a bad person. They make organized religion a bad idea though. And the head of that religion has to shoulder some responsibility.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 01:09 PM

Oh do tell us all Guest 12:53 PM, why the Armenian genocide is a "red herring" as you call it?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 01:15 PM

Actually Scaramouche, would you please provide us all with some evidence of what saintly acts JPII performed to end these sorts of gruesome and devastating human conflicts?

Besides his less than admirable position of non-violence and political appeasement in the face of war and genocide, that is?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 01:48 PM

Because the Armenians were the ones being massacred

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: kendall
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 01:50 PM

Joe, I have written to Mr. Carter; if he answeres, I'll post it.

And where was the Pope when Mussolini invaded Ethiopia?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST,Scaramouche
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 01:51 PM

So what would you do?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope: Non-obit thread
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 05 - 01:53 PM

Different Pope, Kendall