 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| The Other Pope John Paul II By Antonio C. Abaya Written April 05, 2005 For the Manila Standard, April 07 issue On the one hand, he was the Pope who apologized for the Church�s mistreatment and condemnation of the Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) for upholding in 1632 the earlier theory of the Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) that the planets revolved around the sun, not the other way around, as the Church had taught and believed for centuries. The Church�s terracentric universe was central to its conceit that Man, created in the image of God, was the centerpiece of God�s creation, and so everything literally and figuratively revolved around him and his planet Earth. This view of the universe was first proposed by the ancient Greeks, Ptolemy and Aristotle in particular, but it was medieval Christianity which made it into an article of faith, to question or contradict which meant imprisonment, torture, even death. At least Pope John Paul II had the courage and humility to apologize for it, even if the apology came 350 years after what became the Church�s most embarrassing mistake. On the one hand, too, he was the Pope who publicly begged forgiveness for Christianity�s institutionalized hatred of the Jews as �Christ killers,� an epithet that has endured for two thousand years, and which found its most ghoulish expression in the gas chambers of Auschwitz and Buchenwald. The Lavabo portion of the Catholic Mass commemorates Pontius Pilate�s washing of his hands of responsibility for the execution of Jesus, thus putting all the blame on the Jews. In actual fact, crucifixion was the Roman punishment for rebellion, and the Romans crucified thousands of Jewish nationalists, not just Jesus and the two �thieves.� The Jewish punishment for blasphemy � which Jesus was accused of by the Jewish elders � was death by stoning. I am still looking for that Harper paperback in my library that anthologized the speeches of one St. Jerome the Golden-Mouthed in medieval Europe, whose screaming diatribes against the Jews make Adolf Hitler sound like Julie Andrews exhorting her wards to sing �Do, Re, Mi.� One has to wonder how anyone with so much hatred in his heart could have been canonized a saint. It was also Pope John Paul II who publicly apologized for the atrocities committed by the Christian Crusaders from Europe who descended on the Holy Land in several waves, from the 11th to the 13th centuries, in largely futile efforts to dislodge the Muslim Saracens from Biblical sites and land sacred to Christianity. Ethnic cleansing in the last decade of the 20th century, as practiced by the Serbs (who are Orthodox Christians) against the Bosnians and the Kosovars (who are Muslims), are but an echo of those earlier atrocities. Not that the Muslims did not commit atrocities of their own against Christians. The Ottoman Turks slaughtered Christian Greeks and Armenians by the hundreds of thousands as recently as the 1920s. But Christianity at least had a towering statesman like Pope John Paul II to beg forgiveness for its excesses. Islam, with a more diffused leadership, did not. On the other hand, even as he reached out to make amends for the Church�s transgressions and misjudgments in the past, Pope John Paul II toed a conservative line on doctrinal and ethical issues (birth control, divorce, homosexuality, the ordination of women), apparently unmindful of the possibility that these hard-line positions might be viewed by present and future generations of the faithful as errors in judgment themselves. Thus his unyielding stance against artificial methods of birth control has been all but ignored by hundreds of millions of Roman Catholics in Western Europe, North America, Australia and elsewhere, and may have contributed significantly to thinning attendance at Sunday Mass and to serious decline in priestly vocations, even in predominantly Roman Catholic countries like Italy, Spain and France. His exhortation in 1994 to Black Africans to abstain from sex altogether, rather than use those evil condoms to protect themselves from HIV AIDS, has, not surprisingly, also been ignored universally, as can be seen from the undiminished, even increasing, toll of AIDS-related deaths in Black Africa. It was his extraordinary personal charisma and his tireless efforts to reach out, rather than the validity or wide acceptance of his conservatism, that explain the global outpouring of genuine sorrow at his passing away. Without that level of charisma, his successor would be hard put to prevail in an increasingly secular world. On another plain, Pope John Paul II has earned his place in history for his role in the downfall of Communism. About five years ago, BBC World telecast a one-hour feature detailing the informal partnership between Pope John Paul II and US President Ronald Reagan that began with Reagan�s visit to the Vatican in June 1982 and continued through several visits of the go-between, US Army Gen. Vernon Walters, a devout Roman Catholic who was formerly deputy director of the CIA and who later became US Ambassador to the United Nations. According to a June 2004 UPI story by Roland Flamini, the Pope and President Reagan were both convinced in the 1980s that the Kremlin could be challenged and could be beaten. The Pope made several visits to his native Poland and gave his considerable moral support to the Solidarity labor movement, started in 1980 and led by Lech Walesa, which became the de facto open opposition to the Communist regime For its part, the US gave Solidarity $50 million in cash and radio and printing equipment, channeled through Swedish trade unions and other Baltic organizations, to enable the Poles to challenge their Communist government effectively. Gen. Walters showed the Pope intel satellite photos of Soviet troop and armor concentrations east of the Polish border, suggesting an imminent Soviet invasion similar to that of Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968), which was averted when Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski, the Polish head of government, declared martial law. The emergence of a Poland defiant of both its Communist government and that government�s Soviet overlord emboldened the people of East Germany and Czechoslovakia, buffered by the Polish land mass, to walk out in their millions on their Communist governments, leading to the crippling of those governments, the unraveling of the Warsaw Pact and the dismantling of the Berlin Wall, all in the extraordinary year of 1989, and eventually (in 1991) the collapse of the Soviet Union itself. ***** Reactions to [email protected] or fax 824-7642. Other articles in www.tapatt.org. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �The Other Pope John Paul II� My Dear Abaya, Being an Atheist has its privileges. The best being "Free Thought". As Jonathan Swift (Gulliver's Travels) circa, AD 1730 once said, "Free-thought does more harm to the Devil than all the Priests put together, because they all have a vested interest in Him". There are over 3000 registered religions. They are all wrong. God is a synaptic connection between the Amygdala and the Cortex in human brains and so God is probably good for humanity, All religions were created for social control and have all been equally bad for humanity. This recently dead Pope was just the latest figurehead of the Quintessential, socially controlling, despotic, hegemony whose sole aim was to maintain the flow of money from the world�s masses to an Elite in the Vatican. Anyone who has read the history of the Catholic Church would know that things like: Goodness, Caring, Compassion, Morality, Etc. have no validity in any of the actions of the Catholic Church, other than a few words and a few Canons spoken and issued at timely moments when they thought the world or the Faithful were listening. Using the rules given to us by Paul in Romans where he alludes to Jesus' "new covenant" for True Christians replacing Moses� "old Covenant, and then fleshing out this "new Covenant", as described in the New Testament, the Catholic Faith is no more than an Idol and Icon worshipping Satanic Cult. Few realize that Constantine's brand of Christianity was Paul's construct and just happened to be the version that won out over ten or so other sects to become Byzantium's faith Even fewer know that after the collapse of Constantinople it was the Irish Monks who copied, carried and safeguarded Paul's version of Christianity in the Irish Monasteries, and totally isolated, digested and regurgitated it on the Moors of Ireland for 600 years. The Catholicism that finally emerged in Europe during the Renaissance as various state religions would have been totally unintelligible to Jesus and probably would have made even Paul run for cover. The two underlying Philosophies of the Church could be personified by the Borgia Popes and the Conquistadores. No greater religious depravities have ever existed, yet some proudly embrace and perpetrate these philosophies even partaking in the latest election of a despotic despoiler of the masses. Some people truly have no shame. Graham Reinders, [email protected] April 08, 2005 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww As in every person who now belongs to history, Pope John Paul II views will be subject to people's review and disagreement. To say however, that he was "unmindful of the possibility that these hard-line positions might be viewed by present and future generations of the faithful as errors in judgment", I believe, is an erroneous assessment of character of the person. I am more convinced that he was totally mindful of such possibility and yet remained firm in his faith, guided only by the truth as the Spirit led him. His encyclicals speak of this wisdom. Being popular does not make one thing or one person right. Neither being ignored does make it wrong. If indeed his call for abstinence is wrong, what does the call for use of condoms and other contraceptions, which by and large has larger corporate (and financial) base has accomplished. Look at America, you can buy condoms even in convenience (sari-sari) store, and where the Church's call for abstinence is largely ignored. And yet, you have all the worst results of promiscuous sex, unwanted pregnancy and abortion, AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. You do not make graft and corruption legal just because politicians and government officials will not refrain from doing so (even if they are Christians and may also be Catholic), and the population somehow accept it as a matter of life. Not because, the majority say it is alright makes it right. To use this as a premise in laying down the foundations of moral guidance will lead us to chaos and anarchy. And then again, if not because of the majority rule, a thief would not have been set free and instead a holy man was nailed on the cross. Arnel Serrano, [email protected] California, USA wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww PONTIUS PILATE WAS NOT JEW. HE WAS ROMAN, SO THAT WAHING OF THE HANDS DURING THE LAVABO MAY NOT TO BE REFERRED TO AS AN ACT OF A JEW. THANKS Ed Valenciano, [email protected] April 08, 2005 MY REPLY. You missed the whole point. Of course, Pontius Pilate was a Roman. He was the highest official of Rome in Judea. Assuming that his washing of his hands at the trial and conviction of Jesus was historically accurate, its commemoration in the Catholic Mass was the Church�s way of absolving the Romans of any responsibility for Jesus� execution, thus putting all the blame on the Jews. Do you understand it now? wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, I like the way you put Pope JPII, in a perspective that reflects the good and the bad in the man, with the good outweighing the bad. Well, to my judgment anyway. He is famous for what the three things he has done that you wrote about: anti-anti semitism, anti-Russia, anti-crusade, which I am inclined to believe that half of the world may not agree as great accomplishments. He was famous too of his travelling, more than any other pope. That, no one denies. He won't, of course, be famous for what he didn't do or for his omissions, and his failures. These do not count in today's appraisal (most) of the man. Maybe later, much later. Today is reserved for mourning yet we exalt the man, extolling all his good deeds. Why the extolling? For exultation? What a crazy mixed up tradition! It is quite an unfair one. Unfair in many sense. Why not also a rendition of the man's failures, inadequacies or handicaps? Sad occasion and yet we try to make ourselves happy or console ourselves by extolling the man's virtues [some we aren't really sure of, or know that are plain lies but say them anyway just to be polite]. A hypocritical move. Why not look into what he couldn't and didn't do? That would be an act consistent with the solemn humorless mourning. Good works we smile, bad ones we express sadness. How do we judge a man? I like your style of appraising him. You wrote of the man's failures too. You said, in fairness I believe, "...his unyielding stance against artificial methods of birth control has been all but ignored by hundreds of millions of Roman Catholics in Western Europe, North America, Australia and elsewhere..." What else were ignored of him? How do we consider his omissions and failures in our judgment of the man? How much weight to place on them? What should the equation be? On the whole though, based on my (peculiar) standards and reckoning, he was okay up until his final years where I think he was already slipping in his duties. He continued to cater with the USA's idea of a good way of life - arts, sports and all, {[including its propensity to sexual pleasures or perversions and violence?]. Why not? He was still biased even if he truly believed it to be. The USA is a Christian country after all and the most powerful in the world. His vision was short in wanting a racially unprejudiced world. He showed prejudice against those who embraced communism even as he finally preached for love of humanity irrespective of faith. He could not in his long years of holding on to the papacy, bring to peace the Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland even with his newly discovered anti-crusade and multi-faith policies. He could not bring his full weight against Israel because he was under Reagan's or USA's influence. He could not make the faithful in Europe fill a third of the pews on Sundays. In some parts only 2.5 - 5% attend Sunday mass. He could not bring himself to give in to a younger man so another Pope can do more - more traveling for one, the kind that helped made him greater [in many eyes] than any other pope in history. He didn't know when his usefulness was over. In his last five years or so, he could hardly walk, could hardly talk. And yet he clung on to his seat. It was a pity watching him feebly care to his flock. Every time I see him do it I feel so sad; I wished him to take a vacation. At times I would ask, "Has he no concept of efficiency?" Another Cardinal in his place as Pope, would still be held as Pope like him. What is so special about JPII? I wondered why he would not give in to any of his possible younger successors. I sometimes think the man was afraid. If so what was he afraid of? I think he considered all his possible successors not equal to the his task. Or, is it that he was fearful he might be unmasked? Were there no secret deals with Reagan and the USA? What of other world leaders? Didn't he make any secret deals with them? Maybe his unwillingness to resign simply was due to his realization that what he was doing, no one else could do or do better. It was not that he was afraid to be unwittingly unmasked or unduly misunderstood. Still, the question nags me. Why hold on to the papacy until death? He was not ready to give up? He has not prepared the throne as he had planned for his successor? He was afraid to meet his Maker because he was yet prepared? He was led to believe that it was still his time. Why, really? Oh, well, at this time it's best to shift our concerns with the incoming Pope, whoever he might be. I wish the new one will be much better that JP-II. Much better by whose standards? Ogie Reyes, [email protected] August 08, 2005 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya, Pope John Paul II had clearly shown the way that the priestly vocation is really about spirituality than temporality. In the Philippines, the hierarchy recognized this problem when it came out with PCP II, a declaration of the return to spirituality, where the laity would, through the parish pastoral council, assist the priest in temporal matters such as funds management, so that the priest could concentrate more on the spiritual. Under PCP II, the priest is supposed to receive only a monthly stipend, and the parish council would be responsible for the sourcing and disposition of funds and the management of parish properties. I believe this pronouncement had been a dismal failure because the priest, accustomed to using the parish funds like these were his own, would not let go of his traditional control of the treasury. Somehow, it is difficult for the Church to escape the criticism that the Filipino priest had become more of a businessman than an apostle of Christ. Unless the priest is shielded from temporal matters or administrative responsibility, spirituality will suffer and the Church will fail the faithful. I think true spirituality is one of the legacies of Pope John Paul II. Yours very truly, Virgilio C Leynes, [email protected] April 08, 2005 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I LOVE THE POPE. Impy Pilapil, [email protected] April 11, 2005 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww |
| (Forwarded by Auggie Surtida, [email protected]) Feedback from Lee Velasquez, Los Angeles CA [email protected] Auggie - I'm willing to bet my last good pair of shoes that John Paul was not apologizing for the fast-held belief by the Church in those times that the universe revolved around man, Rather, this so modern pope, who surely understands that lack of adequate information can cause people (and even institutions) to cling to a belief, was apologizing for the heavy-handedness with which the Church dealt with those who contradicted its beliefs. One must always take into account the climate of the times (esp in the middle ages), and one must remember that Church prelates in those times mostly weren't in it because they have been called by God. Most of the time those who entered the priesthood and had influence enough to ascend the ranks of the Church hierarchy were second or third sons of nobility who stood to inherit nothing because property was almost entailed to the first-born. And therefore, the next best thing for them was the army of the Church - and you can be sure they didn't leave all their bad habits and tendencies at the door when they entered ! I am also willing to bet my last good handbag that Hitler didn't gas the Jews because they "killed" Christ. A lot he cared about Christ ! If he even slightly believed in Christ and what he stands for, how could this mass murderer have acted in the way he did ? No my friend, his real motivation was his own massive ego, his insane belief that only the aryan race deserved to live ! Do not, please do not even utter his name in the same breath as Jesus Christ ! And you can tell that to your friend Antonio Abaya ! MY REPLY. I never wrote that John Paul II apologized �for the fast-held beliefs in those times that the universe revolved around man.� I wrote that John Paul II apologized for the �Church�s condemnation and mistreatment� of Galileo, which he did. And I never wrote that Hitler �gassed the Jews because they �killed� Christ.� Hitler killed the Jews for racial/economic/political reasons. But he took advantage of the prevalent European prejudice against the Jews as �Christ killers� that goes back to medieval times. And this prejudice was/is memorialized and perpetuated in the Lavabo portion of the Catholic Mass which had Pontius Pilate washing his hands of, thus excusing Rome of any responsibility for, the execution of Jesus, thus putting all the blame on the Jews, even though crucifixion was the Roman punishment for rebellion, not the Jewish punishment for blasphemy. And you can tell that to your friend Lee Velasquez. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, I always enjoy reading your well-researched, thoughtful articles. Keep it up. Cheers, Peter Wallace, [email protected] April 19, 2005 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww ONCE IN A GREAT WHILE, GOD ALLOWS US � FAVORS US A GLIMPSE OF HIS WISDOM IN THE PERSON OF GREAT MEN WHO HAVE CHANGED THE COURSE OF HISTORY. EVERYTHING HAS BEEN SAID OF THE LATE POPE JOHN PAUL II, BOTH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE; ON THE WHOLE, POSITIVE. THE ONE FEAT I WILL REMEMBER HIM MOST ENCAPSULATES ANOTHER FAMOUS MAN�S WORDS TO THE EFFECT THAT, �PEOPLE WHO HAVE BROUGHT CHANGE IN THE WORLD DID NOT DO IT BY CHANGING THE PEOPLE WHO GOVERN, AND WHO WIELD POWER, BUT BY INSPIRING THE PEOPLE TO INITIATE AND FINISH THE CHANGE THEY WISH TO OCCUR.� AS WE ALL KNOW NOW, THIS IS HOW JOHN PAUL BROUGHT DOWN COMMUNISM � NOT BY TRADITIONAL BLOODSHED BUT BY REVOLUTIONIZING THE THOUGHTS AND WAYS OF PEOPLE. THAT HE WAS A HOLY, EXTRAORDINARY MORTAL WHO DREW UNPRECEDENTED ADULATION, RESPECT AND LOVE FROM TENS OF MILLIONS REGARDLESS OF SEX, CREED, RACE AND PERSUASION, IS BUT A SUBTLE MANIFESTATION THAT INDEED, WITH GOD, NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE. LONG MAY JOHN PAUL II�S MEMORY AND LEGACY LIVE! Ed Valenciano, [email protected] April 12, 2005 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Forwarded by Rollie Vilarba, [email protected]) Comment: I got up early in the morning to watch the live TV coverage on the Pope's funeral high Mass. I saw Remi Bayoneta deliver her portion of the ""Prayers of the Faithful" in Tagalog. Her delivery was flawless and impeccable. I was proud of her. Filipina 'DH' read prayers in Filipino during Pope's funeral A Filipina domestic helper in Rome was the one tapped by Vatican to recite the Filipino prayer that echoed in the sacred walls of the Vatican during the funeral rites of Pope John Paul II last Friday. Filipino audience glued to their TV sets were astonished Friday when suddenly in the middle of the solemn Latin requiem mass, a prayer in Filipino reverberated across the mass of faithful present at the Vatican's St. Peter's Square. The Filipina, who is now the subject of admiration by many Catholic Filipinos, was Remi Bayoneta, a domestic helper who has been working in Rome for seven years. Ninety percent of Filipinos working in Rome are domestic helpers. Bayoneta, 30, hails from Batangas and was one of the active members of the Filipino community in Rome. She was also actively serving in the Catholic church in Rome, which paved the way for her inclusion in the Holy Mass for the Pope�s funeral. Bayoneta told ABS-CBN News she believes that the Vatican chose Filipino as one of the languages for the final rites to reflect the late Pope's special regard to the Filipinos. "Malaking karangalan ito, hindi lang para sa akin, kundi para sa ating bayan. Parang alay na rin nating ito kay Pope," Bayoneta told ABS-CBN's TV Patrol World. A final rehearsal for the funeral rites was held Thursday inside St. Peter's Basilica, which also allowed Bayoneta to see up-close the Pope for the last time. Aside from Latin and Filipino, the Vatican has chosen other languages to be used during the requiem mass where intentions were read for the Prayers of the Faithful wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Forwarded by Alfredo �Ding� Roces, [email protected]) Below is an interesting subject for discussion. This is not too pleasant a topic, but somebody has to bring it out. Aside from the comments below, I have also two negative points against the late Pope (may he rest in peace), and these are: 1. By going around the world as a figurehead His Holiness centralized the Church and marginalized local clergy so that at present the Vatican does not get any feedback about local parish needs and sentiments but instead simply pronounces doctrine, ex-cathedra, preventing much needed debate. The dialogue is one way, from the top down. 2. While fighting totalitarian Communists in Poland, His Holiness opposed those of the clergy against dictatorships in Latin America (and Marcos too) because the clergy there advocated Liberation Theology which His Holiness interpreted as Marxist and therefore representing his old enemy in Poland, Communism. Thus Catholic martyrs like Bishop Romero are swept under the carpet while the Opus Dei founder is fast-tracked for sainthood. One leading clergy got a public rebuke from His Holiness. All these apropos to current wild political talk about instant sainthood, and of course the election of a new Pope who hopefully will bring some measure of CHANGE in spiritual and human terms. If not, we are doomed to more of the same! Ding Time to speak ill of a dead leader who let millions live in anguish April 13, 2005 Pope John Paul II is remembered as being compassionate, but in many ways he was anything but, writes Emily Maguire. About 5 million people flocked to Rome last weekend to farewell Pope John Paul II. That's the same number of people newly infected with HIV in 2003. That's 10 million people - at least - whose lives have been touched by the man who was Pope. Speaking ill of the dead is not the done thing, which is why all we've heard about the Pope over the past week is that he was an inspirational and compassionate leader who played a significant role in the defeat of communism in Poland. This may be true, but for many his legacy is one of great suffering. There are 40 million adults and children living with HIV/AIDS, and another 15 million children are AIDS orphans. And yet the Catholic Church, under Pope John Paul II, instructed its priests to condemn condom use. Worse, it used its considerable influence in some of the poorest and most AIDS-affected nations to prevent health workers from distributing, or even talking about, condoms. Some examples since the mid-1990s: in Honduras the church intervened to prevent the distribution of 1 million free condoms; in Kenya senior church officials burnt condoms and safe-sex literature and released a pamphlet claiming that condoms cause AIDS; in Nicaragua the church persuaded the Government to pulp a sex education guide that mentioned contraception; and in Zambia officials withdrew a government AIDS prevention campaign because of church pressure. In these nations, and many others, the proclamations of John Paul II have meant millions have died, and will die, from a preventable disease. The AIDS crisis aside, the Pope's anti-contraception stance has contributed to the suffering of the world's poorest women and children. Speaking on ABC's Foreign Correspondent in 2003, Nafis Sadik, a former executive director of the UN Population Fund, related a meeting she had with the Pope in 1994. Sadik had suggested the church could play a role in reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in Third World countries by teaching men not to "impose themselves" on unwilling wives. "Don't you think that the irresponsible behaviour of men is caused by women?" was the Pope's response. So bad luck for women living in Catholic-controlled countries who - whether they want to or not - get pregnant. An abortion is out of the question. In the Pope's last published book, Memory and Identity, abortion is equated with the Holocaust. So women must spend time in overcrowded, under-resourced hospitals, giving birth to children who are likely to suffer chronic hunger- and poverty-related diseases throughout their short, painful lives. Even in the most extreme case imaginable, John Paul II's church was immoveable. Two years ago, a nine-year-old Nicaraguan rape victim was almost prevented from having a termination, thanks to the intervention of the Catholic Church. Her Catholic parents, terrified their little girl would not survive childbirth, defied the Pope and procured an abortion. They were promptly excommunicated from the church they loved. Tragically, the church showed less concern for the children under its care then it did for that girl's violently conceived foetus. In addition to failing to protect hundreds of innocent children from predatory priests, and failing to compensate or adequately apologise to those victims, the Vatican recently displayed horrifying callousness by giving a cushy Rome-based job to Cardinal Bernard Law, the former head of the Boston diocese responsible for covering up multiple child sexual assaults over an extensive period. Again and again in the past week, John Paul II has been remembered as "compassionate" and "loving", yet he was anything but compassionate and loving to homosexuals, describing the push for gay marriage as "a new ideology of evil". He preached that homosexual acts went against the "natural moral law" and warned that to allow children to be adopted by gay couples would be to "do violence" to them. We'll never know how many young men and women have committed suicide or led lives of deceit and anguish because this "great leader" told them the love they felt was "evil". All of this is particularly appalling when you consider that the so-called ancient and unchanging doctrines of the church are anything but. Catholic thought and doctrine has changed countless times over the centuries, and John Paul II apologised for stances taken by his church in the past, acknowledging that what was once thought right was, in hindsight, wrong. In effect, he was also acknowledging that real harm can be caused by a Catholic acting (or failing to act, in the case of the Holocaust) on cold doctrinal legalism rather than concern and compassion for suffering humanity. John Paul II had the power and influence to radically improve the world. From sub-Saharan Africa to South-East Asia, from Northern Ireland to South America, in every major city in the world, and countless villages and towns, millions of the world's citizens trusted this man to rule in their best interests and lead them in living right. The proclamations and instructions of this venerated Pope could have made the world a better, safer, kinder place but, instead, they condemned countless of his flock to lives of suffering and caused millions of excruciating, needless deaths. Emily Maguire is the author of Taming the Beast (Brandl & Schlesinger). OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |